FreeDailyPro Tools

pptx_convert

Read-onlyIdempotent

Convert a presentation from freedailypro between formats: .pptx, .ppt, .pps, .odp (OpenDocument) or Keynote .key in (base64; the type is read from the file's content) to pptx, odp, ppt or pdf out (base64). Done with LibreOffice on the server and the file is deleted straight after. Layouts, fonts and animations can differ slightly; check the result. Up to 40 MB; a password-protected file is refused.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "fileBase64": "<fileBase64>",
      "to": "<to>"
    },
    "name": "pptx_convert"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`to`	Yes	The format to produce
`fileName`	No	The original file name, used to name the result
`fileBase64`	Yes	The presentation, base64 encoded (.pptx, .ppt, .pps, .odp or .key). Up to 40 MB.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

AddedNov 7, 2026

TDQS

A4.6/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the readOnly/idempotent annotations, it discloses the processing engine (LibreOffice on the server), that the uploaded file is deleted immediately, that layouts/fonts/animations may shift and results should be checked, and the hard 40 MB limit plus password-protection rejection. These are exactly the operational facts an agent needs before committing a large binary.

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?

Front-loaded with verb, resource and the full format matrix, followed by short operational caveats; nearly every clause carries information. The parenthetical phrasing ('in (base64; the type is read from the file's content) to ... out (base64)') is slightly convoluted and takes a second read.

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

Completeness5/5

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

With no output schema, the description still tells the agent the result comes back as base64, and it covers input encoding, size limit, failure mode and fidelity caveats. Nothing material for invoking the tool correctly is left out.

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

Parameters4/5

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

Schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3, but the description adds genuine meaning: the input type is inferred from file content (so the extension or fileName is not needed for detection) and the 40 MB limit applies to fileBase64. It restates the enum of target formats rather than adding semantics to 'to'.

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?

States a specific verb (convert) and resource (presentation) and enumerates both input formats (.pptx, .ppt, .pps, .odp, .key) and output formats (pptx, odp, ppt, pdf). No sibling tool in the list performs presentation-format conversion, so an agent can route here unambiguously.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

The description makes the use case clear (reformatting a presentation between supported types) and adds selection constraints: 40 MB cap and refusal of password-protected files, so the agent knows when the call will fail. It does not explicitly name alternatives (e.g. pptx_compress or image_convert), which keeps it from a 5.

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

All FreeDailyPro Tools tools Inspect

Try in Browser

One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources

Need Help?