Retrieve metadata for an image on a specific InDesign page using page and item indexes, so AI agents can inspect image details before editing or exporting.
Get metadata for an image on a page
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| itemIndex | Yes | ||
| pageIndex | Yes | ||
| document_id | No | Which open document to act on: a name (see document_listOpen) or a 0-based index. Defaults to the front document. |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.6.1Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. 'Get' implies a read, but nothing states permissions, whether it mutates anything, or what fields the metadata contains - a significant gap for a tool with zero annotation coverage.
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?
A single short sentence that is front-loaded and wastes no words. It is efficient, though arguably too terse given the gaps elsewhere.
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 3-parameter tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description should say what metadata is returned and how the page/item indices are resolved. Neither is covered, leaving the definition under-specified for correct invocation.
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 only 33%: document_id is documented in the schema, but pageIndex and itemIndex are bare integers with no description. The phrase 'on a page' hints that pageIndex/itemIndex locate the image, but it adds no real semantics for the two required parameters.
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?
States a specific verb and resource ('Get metadata for an image on a page'), which is clearly a read operation. It does not, however, distinguish itself from siblings like image_list or image_getLinks, so an agent must infer the boundary on its own.
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?
There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus the nearby image_list or image_getLinks, nor any precondition or exclusion stated. The agent is left to guess usage from the name alone.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.