Skip to main content
Glama

APICK Convert

by app.apick

PDF 워터마크 삽입

draw_watermark_pdf
Read-only

Draw a visible text watermark across every page of a PDF file. PDF 파일 전체 페이지에 텍스트 워터마크를 삽입한 PDF 를 반환합니다. 글자 크기·색상·투명도·각도·밀집도·적용 영역을 조절할 수 있으며, PDF 형식의 파일만 허용됩니다. [호출당 10포인트]

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
wmYes워터마크 문자열 (최대 30자)
angleNo워터마크 각도 (0 ~ 360, 기본값 35)
colorNo워터마크 색상 HEX (000000 ~ FFFFFF, 기본값 EEEEEE)
widthNo워터마크 적용 너비 (0 ~ 2000, 기본값 550, A4 기준)
heightNo워터마크 적용 높이 (0 ~ 2000, 기본값 800, A4 기준)
densityNo워터마크 글자 밀집도 (100 ~ 200, 기본값 150)
opacityNo워터마크 투명도 (0 ~ 1, 기본값 0.05)
pdf_urlYes다운로드 가능한 https URL (허용 형식: application/pdf) (최대 25MB)
font_sizeNo워터마크 글자 크기 (8 ~ 30, 기본값 10)

TDQS

A3.9/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false. The description adds that the tool returns a new PDF, applies the watermark across every page, supports adjustable parameters, and notes a per-call cost of 10 points. This goes beyond the structured annotations and schema.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description consists of two sentences, front-loaded with a clear English directive followed by a Korean translation. It includes a cost notice and is economical overall, though the bilingual repetition adds slight redundancy.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

With 9 parameters and no output schema, the description conveys essential behavior: returns a PDF, covers all pages, and only accepts PDF format. Parameter details are fully documented in the schema, so no critical context is missing.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description lists adjustable attributes (font size, color, opacity, angle, density, area) which exactly mirror the schema properties, providing no additional semantic information beyond what the parameter descriptions already offer.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the tool 'Draw a visible text watermark across every page of a PDF file' and continues with the Korean equivalent, specifying the return of a watermarked PDF. This specific verb+resource combination distinguishes it from sibling tools like draw_watermark_image.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The tool's purpose is clearly implied for adding text watermarks to PDFs, and it notes that only PDF files are allowed. However, it does not explicitly compare with alternatives such as draw_watermark_image or set_watermark, nor does it mention when not to use the tool.

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

All APICK Convert toolsInspect
Try in Browser
RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A3.6/5.0
Disambiguation5/5

Each tool has a clearly distinct purpose, including the watermark pair: draw_watermark_image is visible text while set_watermark embeds an invisible code. The TTS job lifecycle tools are also cleanly separated by action and output type.

Naming Consistency3/5

The set mixes conventions: conversion tools use input_to_output, watermark tools use verb_noun, TTS jobs use a tts_jobs_ prefix, and stt is a bare acronym. The names are readable but do not follow one predictable pattern.

Tool Count3/5

At 19 tools, the server sits in the borderline 16-25 range and spans document conversion, image processing, watermarking, audio/video, and async TTS. Most tools earn their place, but the overall surface feels somewhat heavy for a single conversion-focused server.

Completeness4/5

The server covers its core domains well: document conversions, watermarking with both visible and invisible methods, PDF operations, and a full async TTS workflow. Minor gaps exist, such as missing image-to-PDF or Excel-to-JSON inverse conversions, but agents can generally complete workflows without dead ends.

Resources