Free Photoshop MCP

Recursos del documento

ps_resources

Inspect a Photoshop document's resources: fonts installed or missing, linked files and their status, embedded smart objects, text colors, and detected issues.

Instructions

Qué recursos usa el proyecto y cómo están definidos: fuentes (instaladas o no), archivos vinculados (ruta, biblioteca de Creative Cloud, perdidos/modificados), objetos inteligentes incrustados, colores de texto y problemas detectados.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "ps_resources"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`doc`	No	Documento (nombre o índice desde 1). Por defecto el activo.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Oct 17, 2026

TDQS

A3.5/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses valuable behavioral content — it reports font install state, linked-file paths/libraries/lost-modified status, and detected problems, implying a diagnostic read operation — but never explicitly states that it is read-only and side-effect free, nor how results are returned.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

A single, front-loaded sentence that enumerates the covered resource categories compactly via parentheticals. It is dense but every clause adds a distinct category; no filler sentences.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a single-optional-parameter read tool with no output schema, the description gives a thorough account of the returned information categories, which is the main thing an agent needs. It falls short only on explicit read-only confirmation and usage routing, which are minor here.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the single 'doc' parameter (name or 1-based index, defaulting to active) is already fully documented in the schema. The description adds no parameter-level detail beyond what the schema provides, so the baseline of 3 applies.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific information-gathering purpose — reporting what resources a project uses and how they are defined — and enumerates the resource categories (fonts, linked files, smart objects, text colors, detected problems). An agent can tell this is a read/inspection tool distinct from mutation siblings, though it doesn't explicitly name alternatives like ps_fonts or ps_document_info.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Usage is only implied: an agent can infer this is for auditing a document's assets, but there is no explicit when-to-use, when-not-to-use, or guidance pointing to ps_fonts or ps_document_info as alternatives. The listing of covered categories implicitly scopes the tool.

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