Move the active layer to the bottom of the layer stack in Photoshop to adjust layer order and z-depth.
Move the active layer to the bottom of the layer stack
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| document_id | No | 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. |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations provided, the description is the sole behavioral disclosure. It clearly states the core effect of reordering the active layer, but it does not mention edge behavior such as what happens if the layer is already at the bottom, if no layer is active, or if a background layer exists.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is a single sentence that is front-loaded with the action and target, contains no filler, and every word contributes meaning.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
For a simple reorder operation with one optional and fully documented parameter, the description is mostly complete. It lacks a note about the active-layer prerequisite and possible failure or edge cases, but these are not severe gaps given the tool's simplicity.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
The only parameter, document_id, is already fully documented in the schema, including its source and purpose. The tool description adds no additional parameter semantics, and with 100% schema coverage the baseline of 3 is appropriate.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description uses a specific verb ('Move'), a concrete resource ('active layer'), and an exact destination ('bottom of the layer stack'). This clearly differentiates it from sibling tools such as move_layer_to_top, move_layer_up, move_layer_down, and move_layer_to_position.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The intended use is implied by the description—use this when the active layer should go to the bottom. However, it does not explicitly mention when to choose this over the sibling movement tools, nor does it state exclusions, preconditions, or alternatives.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.