Apply Auto Contrast to the active layer in Photoshop to automatically adjust the tonal range, balancing highlights and shadows for improved image contrast.
Apply Auto Contrast to the active layer.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
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 full behavioral burden. It identifies the target (active layer) but says nothing about whether the change is destructive, whether it is undoable, whether it requires a pixel layer versus a smart object, or what permissions/state are needed.
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?
A single short sentence with the action and target front-loaded and zero wasted words. Appropriate for a no-argument command.
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?
The presence of an output schema removes the need to explain return values, and the tool is simple with no parameters. Still, for a parameterless mutation with no annotations, the description omits any behavioral context an agent would want before firing it.
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 tool takes no parameters, so the schema-grounding baseline of 4 applies. There is no parameter detail the description could or should add.
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 uses a specific verb ('Apply') plus resource ('Auto Contrast') and target scope ('active layer'), so an agent immediately knows the operation. However, it does not differentiate from close siblings like photoshop_auto_levels, photoshop_adjust_curves_auto, or photoshop_adjust_brightness_contrast.
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 indication of when to choose Auto Contrast over the related auto/curve/level tools, nor any stated prerequisites or exclusions. The agent is left to infer usage entirely.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.