Fetch a hosted image by id. Caller must own it.
Returns the full image record including the serving URL. Raises
image_not_found (404) when the image does not exist or belongs to
another user (existence masking: the two cases are not distinguished).
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| image_id | Yes | The hosted image to act on, identified by its UUID. |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Adds return content ('full image record including serving URL') and error behavior with existence masking, going beyond readOnlyHint annotation.
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 concise sentences: purpose, return value, error handling. No redundancy, front-loaded.
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?
With output schema existing, description sufficiently covers purpose, ownership, return content, and error behavior. Complete for a simple get tool.
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?
Only one parameter with 100% schema coverage. Description adds no additional semantic detail beyond what 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?
Clearly states 'Fetch a hosted image by id' with specific verb and resource. Ownership requirement distinguishes it from tools like list_images, update_image, delete_image.
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?
Explicit ownership constraint guides usage, but no mention of when not to use or alternatives like list_images or get_image_generator.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
