Skip to main content
Glama
alisaitteke

Photoshop MCP Server

by alisaitteke
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

photoshop_set_layer_locked

Idempotent

Locks or unlocks the active layer to block or allow edits. Use when the user requests locking or unlocking the current layer.

Instructions

Set the all-lock flag on the active layer. locked: true blocks further edits to that layer; false clears the lock.

Use when: the user asks to lock or unlock the current layer. Do NOT use when: the layer should only be hidden — use photoshop_set_layer_visibility. Do NOT use when: a different layer is the target — use photoshop_select_layer_by_name first.

Returns: confirmation of the lock state. Preconditions: active document and active layer. Side effects: sets layer.allLocked. The same boolean is idempotent. Reversible with photoshop_undo or by calling again with the opposite value.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
lockedYesWhether the layer should be locked
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"
+]
    • changedInput schema / required
      Previous value: -[
-  "locked"
-]New value: +[
+  "locked",
+  "document_id"
+]
  3. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A4.7/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, idempotentHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuinely new behavior: preconditions (active document and active layer required), the concrete side effect (sets layer.allLocked), and reversibility via photoshop_undo or the opposite value. The only redundancy is restating idempotency, which the annotation already provides.

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, then labeled blocks (Use when / Do NOT use when / Returns / Preconditions / Side effects) that make scanning trivial. Every sentence carries a distinct fact; nothing is padding despite the length.

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?

No output schema exists, yet the description states what comes back (confirmation of lock state) plus preconditions, side effects, idempotency and undo path. For a two-parameter, low-risk mutation, an agent has everything needed to call it correctly and recover from it.

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

Parameters4/5

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

Schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3, and the description earns above baseline by explaining what the boolean actually does ("true blocks further edits to that layer; false clears the lock") rather than only echoing the schema's "Whether the layer should be locked". document_id semantics remain schema-only, which is fine at full coverage.

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 and resource ("Set the all-lock flag on the active layer") and immediately differentiates from the nearest sibling by naming photoshop_set_layer_visibility as the wrong tool for hiding. An agent can distinguish this from the other ~120 layer/selection tools 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?

Explicit "Use when" and two "Do NOT use when" clauses, each naming the correct alternative (photoshop_set_layer_visibility for hide-only, photoshop_select_layer_by_name when the target is a different layer). Routing is fully determined.

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