Skip to main content
Glama
alisaitteke

Photoshop MCP Server

by alisaitteke
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

photoshop_recipe_enhance_portrait

Enhance portrait photos by smoothing skin, retouching blemishes, and adjusting tones with a reversible, non-destructive layer group.

Instructions

Set up a non-destructive portrait enhancement: duplicates the active layer, builds a frequency separation pair (low/high) for skin smoothing, and adds an auto-tone curves adjustment on top. Grouped as "Enhance Portrait" and reversible with one undo.

Users often say: smooth skin, retouch portrait, fix blemishes, clean up face.

Use when: the user asks to "enhance", "retouch", "clean up" or "smooth" a portrait photo and is happy with a baseline that they can further tweak interactively. Do NOT use when: the user wants destructive, final edits — recommend manual frequency separation work via photoshop_recipe_frequency_separation instead so they can paint by hand.

Returns: { ok, summary, details: { intensity, radius_px, group_name } }.

Preconditions: active document with a NORMAL or background-converted raster layer. Side effects: appends one layer group of 2-3 layers above the active layer; original layer untouched.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
intensityNoRetouch strength: low (subtle), medium (default), high (heavier smoothing).medium
document_idNoOptional 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.
skin_smoothingNoWhether to build the frequency separation pair. When false, only the auto-tone curves are added.
use_neural_skinNoApply Neural Filter skin smoothing via UXP bridge before frequency separation (default false)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A4.7/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

There are no annotations, so the description carries the full burden. It clearly states the operation is non-destructive, explains that the original layer is untouched, mentions the resulting layer group, notes that it is reversible with one undo, and lists preconditions and side effects. This is unusually thorough for a no-annotation tool.

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?

The description is structured into a clear main sentence, user intent mapping, usage guidance, return shape, preconditions, and side effects. Every section adds decision-relevant information and there is no filler.

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 complex recipe with no annotations and no output schema, this description is complete: it defines the procedure, its non-destructive nature, when to use it, when not to, what it returns, what it requires, and what side effects it causes. An agent can correctly select and invoke this tool without needing additional context.

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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the input schema already documents every parameter and its effect. The description does not add new parameter-level meaning beyond the schema, but it does reference intensity in the return details. Baseline 3 is appropriate here.

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?

The description names a specific verb and resource ('Set up a non-destructive portrait enhancement') and then concretely enumerates the steps: duplicate active layer, build frequency separation pair, add auto-tone curves. It is clearly distinguishable from sibling recipe tools like photoshop_recipe_frequency_separation and photoshop_recipe_remove_background.

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?

The description provides explicit user phrases ('enhance', 'retouch', 'clean up', 'smooth') that should trigger this tool, and an explicit exclusion: 'Do NOT use when: the user wants destructive, final edits', with a named alternative tool. This is exactly the directiveness an agent needs.

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