Sometimes - even frequently - less is more. Definitely agree with those who say Paris, or Italy. Not both. Or, the alternative of adding Munich or Vienna.
Fewer destinations? Smaller cities? We were in Prague in 2018 and we were stunned by the numbers of global tourists, though we also found pockets with fewer tourists and areas/experiences off the tourist track that were charming, engaging and where there were friendly locals. BTW, the Mucha Museum - quite small - was a treat that we enjoyed a day or two after our early morning visit to the Prague Castle.
In Italy twice: 2003 and 2015. Florence, in particular, was so much more crowded and graffiti filled in 2015; both trips were shoulder season. (Late Sept-early Oct 2003; May 2015). In general, smaller towns with fewer travelers were more comfortable. Of course, if you have certain "must sees," like the Vatican Museum or Da Vinci's Last Supper, they are only in fixed locations. But, great Renaissance art may also be found in smaller cities. Padova, for example, not far from Venice has the Scrovegni Chapel with Giotto's early (early 14th c.) frescoes and Orvieto has a magnificent Cathedral with great, though haunting, frescoes by Signorelli. Should you go to Venice with its crowds, you might also want to and an extra day, so you can spend spend a half day on Murano or Burano...and just slow down, catch your breath and have some time to linger.
When you slow down, you might find the 'back door' experiences that Rick Steves talks about. When we were in Milan for the last three nights our our 2-1/2 week 2015 Italy trip, we spoke to a couple who lived there and we learned that 'Piano City' was happening that weekend. So, we made our obligatory trips to the Duomo and The Last Supper, but we spent more time listening to classical and jazz soloists and duetists in one of the city's parks, about a mile north of the Duomo. That unanticipated experience was a highlight of our trip.