Exports a diagram as a base64-encoded JPEG image (max 1024px) for use with the Claude API.
Export a diagram as a JPEG image (base64 encoded, max 1024px).
Returns MCP ImageContent containing the resized diagram image. The image is re-encoded as JPEG for compatibility with the Claude API.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| diagram_id | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.1Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
The description discloses the output type (MCP ImageContent), the resizing to max 1024px, and the JPEG re-encoding for Claude API compatibility. However, it does not explicitly state whether the operation is read-only or if any side effects occur, and with no annotations the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure.
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 concise with two sentences, front-loading the core action ('Export a diagram as a JPEG image') and then providing necessary details. No extraneous information.
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 export tool with one parameter, the description covers the output format and key constraints (max size, encoding). It lacks context on how to get diagram_id and does not mention error conditions, but overall it is reasonably complete for a tool of this complexity.
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?
The schema has 0% description coverage for the single parameter diagram_id, and the description does not add any details about what diagram_id represents or how to obtain it. The description fails to compensate for the schema gap, leaving the parameter under-specified.
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 explicitly states the tool exports a diagram as a JPEG image, specifying format, encoding (base64), and max size (1024px). It clearly differentiates from all sibling tools, none of which perform image export.
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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention any conditions, exclusions, or related tools such as list_diagrams or export_requirements_matrix, leaving the agent to infer usage.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.