Move the active layer to the top of the layer stack in Photoshop to reorder layers for proper stacking and visibility.
Move the active layer to the top 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?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the behavioral burden. It clearly discloses the core effect (moving the active layer to the top of the layer stack), but it does not mention side effects such as whether the active layer remains active, what happens if it is already at the top, or response behavior.
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 front-loaded sentence with no filler or repetition. Every word earns its place.
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 one-parameter mutation, the description together with the schema gives the agent what it needs: the object (active layer), the operation (move), and the destination (top). No output schema exists, and the description does not detail return values, but the core invocation context is complete.
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 fully explained in the input schema, including the activation behavior when set. Schema description coverage is 100%, so the description does not need to add parameter detail; 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 states a specific verb and resource: 'Move the active layer to the top of the layer stack.' The destination 'top' distinguishes it clearly from sibling tools like photoshop_move_layer_to_bottom, photoshop_move_layer_up, and photoshop_move_layer_down.
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?
There is no guidance on when to choose this tool over the sibling reordering tools (e.g., move_layer_to_position, move_layer_up) or any prerequisites such as needing an active layer. The only usage signal is the destination implied by the tool's own name.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.