Split a PDF into parts. Provide ranges like "1-3, 5, 8-10" (each comma group becomes one output PDF), or omit ranges to get every page as its own PDF. Returns base64 files.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| file | Yes | The PDF file, base64-encoded (max 10 MB) | |
| ranges | No | e.g. "1-3, 5, 8-10"; omit for one file per page |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries the disclosure burden. It does disclose the base64-file return format and default page-splitting behavior, but it does not state whether the input PDF is modified, how the returned files are structured, or any failure/limit behavior.
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?
Two concise sentences with a concrete example, the default behavior, and return format. Every clause earns its place and no filler is present.
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 two-parameter tool, the description covers input format, range syntax, default behavior, and return type. It could improve by adding sibling-tool routing or an example of the returned base64 structure, but nothing essential is missing.
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 already covers the parameters, but the description adds meaning by explaining that each comma group becomes one output PDF and that omitting ranges yields one PDF per page. This goes beyond the schema's terse examples.
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 action ('Split a PDF into parts') and defines the output granularity with range syntax. It is clear but does not explicitly distinguish itself from the similar extract_pages or remove_pages siblings.
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?
Provides two clear usage modes: supply comma-separated ranges for grouped outputs, or omit ranges for one file per page. It does not explicitly state when to prefer this over sibling tools, but the usage context is unambiguous.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Each tool targets a distinct PDF operation: page numbering, watermarking, flattening, metadata read/write, and various page selection/rearrangement tasks. Although extract_pages, remove_pages, and split_pdf all involve page ranges, their descriptions clearly differentiate extracting a subset, deleting a subset, and partitioning into multiple outputs.
All tool names follow a consistent verb_noun pattern in lowercase snake_case, such as add_page_numbers, get_pdf_metadata, merge_pdfs, and rotate_pdf. The pattern is predictable across the entire set, with no mixed conventions or vague verbs.
Ten tools is a well-scoped size for a PDF utility server. Each tool earns its place by covering a distinct common PDF manipulation task without redundancy or feature bloat.
The toolset covers core PDF operations: page extraction, removal, splitting, merging, rotation, watermarking, page numbering, flattening, and metadata read/write. Notable minor gaps include encryption/decryption and page reordering, but the provided surface handles most routine PDF workflows without dead ends.