Place Image

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

The description adds behavioral context beyond annotations: it mentions the default Smart Object placement and non-destructive editing, which aligns with the non-destructive annotation. It does not describe error handling or behavior for missing files, but overall it reveals key traits.

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 extremely concise—two sentences that front-load the core action and then add a key detail. Every word earns its place with no repetition or filler.

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?

Given the tool has 6 parameters and no output schema, the description covers the main purpose but omits potential error cases (e.g., file not found, unsupported format) and does not specify whether it returns the placed layer. It is adequate but not fully comprehensive.

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?

Schema coverage is 100% with clear individual parameter descriptions. The tool description adds only a summary statement ('Optionally set position and dimensions'), which provides minimal extra meaning beyond the schema. Thus baseline score 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 the specific verb 'places', the resource 'external image file', and the context 'into the active document'. It clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like ps_create_layer (creates empty layer) or ps_smart_object (converts existing layers).

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 description explains the default behavior (placed as Smart Object for non-destructive editing) and option to set position and dimensions, providing clear context for when to use this tool. However, it does not explicitly contrast with alternatives or state when not to use it.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.