Read Node Image

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false. The description adds valuable behavior beyond annotations by specifying the mixed ToolResult with TextContent and ImageContent, and noting that the image property is excluded from text content to avoid duplication. No contradiction with annotations.

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 compact and well-structured: a one-sentence purpose, a concise return-type note, and a bulleted Usage list. Every sentence adds information with no redundancy or filler.

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 read-only tool with no output schema, the description explains the return shape (mixed ToolResult), all parameter defaults, and integration with sibling tools. It covers all four parameters and the main integration need, making it complete enough for an agent to invoke correctly.

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 coverage is 100%, but the description adds cross-tool context by telling the agent where to source node_element_id and clarifies default/fallback behavior for mime_type ('read from node's imageMimeType, else image/png'). This goes beyond the schema's descriptions.

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 opens with 'Retrieve a base64 image stored on a Neo4j node, plus selected text properties,' which is a specific verb+resource+scope combination. It clearly distinguishes this tool from sibling search/query tools by focusing on image retrieval from a node.

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 Usage section explicitly tells the agent where to get node_element_id ('from vector_search/fulltext_search/read_neo4j_cypher (nodeId field)') and documents defaults for image_property and mime_type. It doesn't explicitly state when not to use it, but the guidance is concrete and actionable.

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