Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
indesign-nutria-mcp

indesign-nutria-mcp

by nutriandrea
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

layer_reorder

Move a layer to a new position in the layer stack. Reorder layers in an open InDesign document by specifying current and target indices.

Instructions

Move a layer to a new position in the layer stack

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "layerIndex": "<layerIndex>",
      "newIndex": "<newIndex>"
    },
    "name": "layer_reorder"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
newIndexYes
layerIndexYes
document_idNoWhich open document to act on: a name (see document_listOpen) or a 0-based index. Defaults to the front document.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.6.1

TDQS

C2.8/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are supplied, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It only says the layer moves and does not disclose whether other layers shift, whether the operation is destructive or reversible, what permissions are required, or how errors are reported.

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

Conciseness5/5

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

The description is a single front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. It states the action and destination immediately.

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

Completeness2/5

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

For a mutation tool with no annotations, no output schema, and incomplete schema coverage, the description is too sparse. It omits prerequisites, index-shifting behavior, and the optional document_id default documented only in the schema.

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

Parameters2/5

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

Schema description coverage is low (33%), and the description adds no parameter meaning. It does not explain layerIndex or newIndex semantics, such as whether they are 0-based, how newIndex interacts with existing indices, or what happens if the target position is already occupied.

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 verb (Move) and resource (layer) plus the target concept (new position in the layer stack), so the tool's purpose is clear. It does not explicitly differentiate itself from siblings like layer_create, layer_delete, or layer_setProperties, though the reorder operation is naturally distinct.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

No when-to-use guidance is provided. It does not say when reordering is appropriate versus layer_setProperties or layer_delete, nor does it mention prerequisites such as having an open document.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools