ps_open_document

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the action but does not explain side effects, error behavior if the path is invalid, or whether an already-open document will be affected.

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?

The description is two short sentences with no redundant information. It front-loads the core action and then states the input requirement, making it easy to parse quickly.

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 one-parameter open operation, the description is mostly adequate, but it lacks guidance on error handling, return behavior, and preconditions. These gaps matter because there is no output schema or annotations to fill them.

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% and the single 'path' parameter is already described as '本地文件完整路径'. The description's '传入文件完整路径' adds no additional semantic detail beyond the schema, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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?

The description uses a specific verb ('打开' / open), identifies the resource ('本地图片/PSD 文件'), and names the file type. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like ps_create_document and ps_close_document.

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 the tool is for opening an existing local file, which differentiates it from create/close operations, but it does not explicitly state when to prefer this tool over alternatives or mention any preconditions such as Photoshop already running.

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