ps_create_document

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It states the core create behavior but omits material side effects for a mutation tool: whether the new document becomes the active document, whether it is unsaved, and what the call returns or how success is signaled.

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 compact and well-ordered: purpose first, usage triggers second, parameter notes last. Every sentence earns its place, and there is no filler or redundancy.

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?

Because there is no output schema and no annotations, the description should explain what happens after creation, such as the new document being active, its unsaved state, and the expected return value. That context is missing, which leaves an incomplete picture for chaining with sibling tools like ps_add_layer.

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%, so the schema already documents all three parameters. The description adds useful examples and restates the height-equals-width default, but it does not add deeper parameter semantics beyond what the schema provides.

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 leads with a specific action and resource: creating a new Photoshop document at given pixel dimensions. It reinforces this with two concrete natural-language examples, making it easy to distinguish from sibling tools like ai_create_document or ps_resize_document.

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?

It gives explicit trigger conditions with example user utterances ('当用户说…'), so an agent knows when to invoke it. However, it does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use it, which keeps it just below the top score.

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