select_objectsSelect Illustrator objects by UUID, then manipulate them interactively. Pass an empty array to deselect all.
Select objects by UUID. Pass an empty array to deselect all. Selected objects can then be manipulated interactively in Illustrator.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| uuids | Yes | Array of object UUIDs to select. Pass empty array [] to deselect all. |
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, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the deselect behavior and the downstream interactivity consequence, but does not say whether a new call replaces the existing selection or whether the selection persists beyond the session.
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?
Three short sentences, front-loaded with the core action and no filler. The empty-array rule slightly duplicates the schema text, keeping it just short of maximally tight.
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 one-parameter, non-destructive, no-output tool this is close to adequate, but it omits the important semantic of whether passing UUIDs replaces or extends the current selection. That gap matters for correctly chaining selection with modify_object or delete_objects.
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?
There is a single parameter with 100% schema description coverage, so the baseline is 3. The description restates the schema's empty-array-means-deselect rule but adds no format, ordering, or validation detail beyond it.
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: 'Select objects by UUID', which is unambiguous about what the tool operates on. It does not, however, distinguish itself from adjacent siblings such as find_objects or get_selection, leaving the agent to infer the boundary.
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 description implies usage by noting that selected objects 'can then be manipulated interactively', which hints at sequencing after a selection step. It never states when to prefer this over alternatives like find_objects or get_selection, and gives no prerequisites or exclusions.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.