Skip to main content
Glama

KDAN PDF

by com.kdandoc.mcp

Check Upload Status

check_upload_status
Read-onlyIdempotent

Check existing uploads and determine which files still need uploading.

Call this BEFORE upload_pdf or create_upload_page to avoid duplicate uploads. Also call it after the user uploads via the widget to discover the new file and its job_id.

Returns 'session_id' (always — store it!), plus:

  • 'already_uploaded': files from pending_filenames that are already in this session, with reusable job_ids (empty when pending_filenames is omitted)

  • 'needs_upload': files not yet in this session (must be uploaded)

  • 'jobs' / 'count': every file currently stored in this session

You MUST call this tool before any upload, and you MUST act on its result immediately. When you passed pending_filenames:

  • 'needs_upload' is non-empty → call upload_pdf (single) or batch_upload_pdf (multiple) with ONLY the files listed in 'needs_upload'. Pass the same session_id. Do NOT upload files in 'already_uploaded'.

  • 'needs_upload' is empty → skip uploading entirely; use the job_ids from 'already_uploaded'.

When pending_filenames is omitted, 'already_uploaded' and 'needs_upload' are always empty and carry NO meaning — read 'jobs' instead. A non-empty 'jobs' means the files are already here: use those job_ids and do NOT ask the user to upload again.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
session_idNoSession ID from a previous upload_pdf or create_upload_page call. If omitted, a new session_id is generated and ALL pending files are treated as needs_upload (new workflow).
pending_filenamesNoBare filenames to check, e.g. ['FileA.pdf', 'FileB.pdf']. Never include directory paths like '/mnt/data/FileA.pdf'.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
jobsYes
countYes
reply_noteYes
session_idYes
instructionsYes
needs_uploadYes
already_uploadedYes

TDQS

A4.8/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Even with readOnlyHint and idempotentHint annotations, the description adds substantial behavioral context: it explains session_id generation when omitted, the exact meaning of 'already_uploaded' vs 'needs_upload', and that when pending_filenames is omitted those fields are meaningless and you must read 'jobs' instead. This goes well beyond the annotation safety hints.

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 is longer than average but structured and front-loaded with the core purpose. Some redundancy exists (e.g., 'You MUST call this tool before any upload' appears in both the opening and the instructions), but the detailed guidance is relevant and organized by return field, making it navigable.

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?

Despite having an output schema, the description goes beyond it by explaining how to interpret the outputs in different call scenarios (with/without pending_filenames) and what actions to take on each result. It covers all necessary behavior for a tool that orchestrates uploads, so nothing is missing for correct use.

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. The description adds value by clarifying the semantics of omitting pending_filenames (fields become empty and meaningless) and reinforcing that session_id must be stored, which is not in the schema. It doesn't over-explain the parameters but provides enough extra context to earn a 4.

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 states a specific verb and resource ('Check existing uploads and determine which files still need uploading') and clearly distinguishes it from siblings by positioning it as a prerequisite to upload_pdf and create_upload_page. It also names the exact result fields, leaving no ambiguity about what the tool does.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

The description explicitly says when to call ('Call this BEFORE upload_pdf or create_upload_page', 'Also call it after the user uploads via the widget') and when not to ('needs_upload is empty → skip uploading entirely'). It also names the next tools to call (upload_pdf, batch_upload_pdf) and how to act on the result, providing strong usage guidance.

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

All KDAN PDF 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

A4.2/5.0
Disambiguation5/5

Each tool has a clearly distinct purpose: uploads are split by context (single, batch, widget), content inspection is split by method (text, images, redaction lines), and password operations are split by state (set vs change). Descriptions explicitly cross-reference to prevent confusion.

Naming Consistency4/5

All tools start with a verb (upload, check, compare, compress, create, delete, get, list, redact, set, change, view), but the position of 'pdf' varies (suffix in compress_pdf, middle in get_pdf_info) and some names are compound like 'batch_upload_pdf' and 'get_latest_comparison'. Pattern is readable but not perfectly uniform.

Tool Count4/5

16 tools is slightly above the ideal 3-15 range, but each tool maps to a distinct operation or workflow step in PDF handling. The count feels justified given the breadth of features (upload, compress, delete, password, redact, compare).

Completeness4/5

The surface covers the core PDF lifecycle: upload, view, compress, delete pages, password protection, redaction, and comparison. Minor gaps exist (no merge, split, or rotate), but the primary workflows are fully supported with mandatory pre/post checks.

Resources