Skip to main content
Glama
alisaitteke

Photoshop MCP Server

by alisaitteke
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

photoshop_apply_layer_mask

Destructive

Permanently apply a layer mask by baking it into the layer's pixels and removing the mask, deleting the pixels it hid. Use when the mask must stay applied, not stay editable.

Instructions

Bake the active layer mask into its pixels and remove the mask. Pixels the mask hid are deleted.

Use when: the user wants the mask permanently applied. Do NOT use when: the mask should stay editable — leave it, or create one with photoshop_create_layer_mask. Do NOT use when: the mask should be discarded without changing pixels — use photoshop_delete_layer_mask.

Returns: confirmation that the mask was applied. Preconditions: active document and an active layer that has a mask. Side effects: destroys masked-out pixels and the mask. Reversible with photoshop_undo while history holds it.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
document_idYesPhotoshop document id from photoshop_get_state / photoshop_list_documents. Send null or 0 to use the active document. A positive number activates that document before the tool runs. When no document is open, a stale id does not block the call.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv1.7.33
    • changedInput schema / properties / document_id / description
      Previous value: -"Photoshop document id from photoshop_get_state / photoshop_list_documents. Send null to use the active document. A number activates that document before the tool runs."New value: +"Photoshop document id from photoshop_get_state / photoshop_list_documents. Send null or 0 to use the active document. A positive number activates that document before the tool runs. When no document is open, a stale id does not block the call."
  2. Changed4 schema fields changedv1.7.32
    • addedInput schema / additionalProperties
      Added value: +false
    • changedInput schema / properties / document_id / description
      Previous value: -"Optional Photoshop document id from photoshop_get_state / photoshop_list_documents. When set, the tool activates that document before running so a UI tab switch cannot retarget the edit."New value: +"Photoshop document id from photoshop_get_state / photoshop_list_documents. Send null to use the active document. A number activates that document before the tool runs."
    • changedInput schema / properties / document_id / type
      Previous value: -"number"New value: +[
+  "number",
+  "null"
+]
    • addedInput schema / required
      Added value: +[
+  "document_id"
+]
  3. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A4.7/5.0
Behavior5/5

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=false, but the description adds what is destroyed (masked-out pixels and the mask itself), the precondition (active doc plus masked layer), and the recovery path (photoshop_undo while history holds it). This is rich behavioral detail beyond the annotation flags.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Front-loaded with the core action and consequence, then organized into tight labeled lines for condition, exclusions, return, and side effects. Every sentence carries distinct information with no padding.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a destructive single-param tool with no output schema, the description covers return, preconditions, side effects, and reversibility. An agent has everything needed to decide and call correctly.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Only one parameter and schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents document_id, null/0 semantics, and activation behavior. The description adds nothing about the parameter, which is the expected baseline for a fully-covered single-param tool.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a precise verb and resource ('bake the active layer mask into its pixels and remove the mask') plus the pixel-level consequence. It explicitly names the two sibling masks tools it is not (create_layer_mask, delete_layer_mask), so an agent can route without opening schemas.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Provides explicit 'Use when' plus two 'Do NOT use when' branches, each naming the alternative tool or action to take instead. The decision boundary between applying, keeping, and deleting a mask is fully specified.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

Deploy Server

Other Tools