Skip to main content
Glama
alisaitteke

Photoshop MCP Server

by alisaitteke
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

photoshop_redo

Destructive

Reapply the operation you just undid in Photoshop, like Ctrl/Cmd+Shift+Z. Specify document and optional step count to move history forward; use undo to step back.

Instructions

Redo the previously undone operation(s), equivalent to Ctrl/Cmd+Shift+Z.

Users often say: redo, yinele, geri alınanı uygula. Use when: reapplying the change that was just undone. Do NOT use when: stepping back through history — use photoshop_undo.

Returns: text confirmation with the step count. Preconditions: active document with something on the redo stack. Side effects: moves the history state forward.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
stepsNoNumber of steps to redo (default: 1)
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

A4.5/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already cover the safety profile (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=true, idempotentHint=false), so the bar is lower; the description still adds preconditions (active document with something on the redo stack), side effects (moves history state forward), and the return format (text confirmation with step count). It does not describe what happens when the redo stack is empty or how errors surface, which keeps it short of a 5.

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 definition, then labeled blocks for usage, return, preconditions, and side effects. The multilingual trigger phrases (redo, yinele, geri alınanı uygula) earn their place by aiding intent matching rather than 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?

With no output schema, the description carries the return-value burden and does so ('text confirmation with the step count'). Preconditions, side effects, and the sibling alternative are all present, so an agent has everything needed to call this 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?

Schema description coverage is 100% and the document_id parameter's null/0/stale-id behavior is fully documented in the schema itself. The description adds nothing new about parameters beyond implying a step count via the return value, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 specific verb (redo) and resource (previously undone operations) plus the keyboard-equivalent anchor Ctrl/Cmd+Shift+Z, which pins the semantics precisely. It explicitly names the sibling it is not (photoshop_undo), so an agent can disambiguate without opening a schema.

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 an explicit 'Use when' condition (reapplying the change just undone) and a 'Do NOT use when' exclusion that routes the agent to photoshop_undo for stepping back through history. Both the trigger and the alternative are stated, leaving nothing to inference.

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