move_to_layerMove objects to another layer by UUID, placing them at the front or back, without activating Illustrator.
Move one or more objects to a different layer. Runs without activating Illustrator in default background mode; never invokes Computer Use.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| uuids | Yes | UUIDs of objects to move | |
| position | No | beginning = front of layer, end = back of layer | beginning |
| target_layer | Yes | Target layer name |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.8.0-local.1Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=false, and openWorldHint=false. The description adds useful behavioral context beyond annotations: it runs in default background mode without activating Illustrator and never invokes Computer Use.
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?
Two concise sentences with purpose front-loaded. Every sentence adds value: the first states what the tool does, and the second adds non-obvious runtime behavior.
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 mutation tool with no output schema and annotations that already cover safety hints, the description is largely complete. It conveys execution mode, though it could mention layer prerequisites or error behavior.
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 schema already documents uuids, position, and target_layer. The description does not add syntax, format, or constraint details 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?
States a specific verb and resource: move one or more objects to a different layer. Scope is clear, but it does not explicitly distinguish itself from related siblings such as manage_layers or set_z_order.
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?
No guidance is given about when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor are prerequisites or exclusions stated. The purpose implies usage, but the description contains no explicit routing or context guidance.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.