ps_closeClose a Photoshop document without saving by default, or save it first when save=true. Target the active document or specify one by name or 1-based index.
Cierra un documento (sin guardar salvo save=true).
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| doc | No | Documento (nombre o índice desde 1). Por defecto el activo. | |
| save | No |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations, so the description carries the burden. It discloses the critical behavior that closing discards unsaved changes unless save=true, which is important. But it doesn't mention if the document is removed from the workspace, whether it prompts confirmation, or what happens to the application state.
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?
Single short sentence, front-loaded with the core action and the key conditional. No wasted words, though it could be slightly more informative without excess.
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 2-param tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description covers the main action and the save behavior. However, it lacks details on default document handling, error conditions (e.g., closing last document), or return values.
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 50%; the doc parameter has a description in schema but save does not. The description clarifies save's effect ('sin guardar salvo save=true'), adding meaning beyond the bare boolean, but does not explain doc's default beyond what the schema already says.
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?
States a specific verb (cerrar) and resource (documento), which is clear. However it does not differentiate from other closing/terminating operations among siblings like ps_save or ps_open, though 'close' is unambiguous.
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 'sin guardar salvo save=true' clause implies when to use save=true, giving implied usage guidance. But there is no explicit when-to-use vs alternatives like ps_save.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.