ps_save_as_psd

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It does not state what happens when path is omitted, whether an existing file is overwritten, or whether the operation affects the currently open document. These are material gaps for a save operation.

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 appropriately short for a one-parameter tool and front-loads the core action. The second sentence about path is somewhat redundant with the schema, but overall the structure is efficient and free of clutter.

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?

For a simple save-as tool, the description covers the essential operation and the optional path parameter. However, the undefined default save location when path is omitted and lack of overwrite behavior documentation leave the context incomplete for a mutating operation without annotations or an output schema.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3 even though the description adds no new meaning. The description merely repeats that path is the optional save path, which the schema already documents; nothing is added beyond the schema.

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 operation precisely: save the current Photoshop document as PSD format. It identifies the verb, resource, and target format, and the format clearly distinguishes it from sibling save tools like ps_save_as_png and ps_save_as_jpg.

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?

Use is implied from the stated purpose, and it correctly scopes the tool to the current Photoshop document. However, it does not explicitly explain when to choose this over the sibling save formats or mention exclusions, leaving usage guidance to inference.

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