给 PDF 每页加页码（可选前后缀）+ 可选页眉（1 credit/次，中英皆可）。失败自动退款。
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| start | No | 起始页号（默认 1） | |
| header | No | 可选页眉文字（每页顶部居中）；留空=不加 | |
| prefix | No | 页码前缀，如 '第 ' | |
| suffix | No | 页码后缀，如 ' 页' 或 '/10' | |
| file_id | Yes | 目标 PDF 文件 ID | |
| filename | No | 可选输出文件名 | |
| position | No | 页码位置：bottom-center / bottom-left / bottom-right / top-center / top-left / top-right | bottom-center |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It mentions credit cost and refund policy, but does not disclose whether the original file is modified, required permissions, or other behavioral traits like idempotency or limits.
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?
The description is a single efficient sentence that front-loads the core functionality and includes credit cost and refund details. It is concise, but lacks structural elements like bullet points or separate sections.
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?
Given the tool has 7 parameters and no output schema, the description should explain return values or output behavior. It fails to mention that a new PDF is likely created (implied by the filename parameter) or what the tool returns, leaving information gaps.
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 description coverage is 100%, so parameters are well-documented in the schema. The description adds only a high-level summary without providing additional meaning beyond what the schema already offers.
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?
The description clearly states the tool adds page numbers and optional headers to PDFs. It uses specific verbs and resources, and distinguishes from sibling tools that perform different PDF operations like compression, encryption, or watermarking.
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?
The description implies the tool is used when page numbering or headers are needed, but does not explicitly state when not to use it or suggest alternative tools. The context is clear but lacks explicit usage boundaries.
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 has a unique purpose with clear naming (e.g., pdf_compress vs pdf_encrypt). The two watermark tools are distinguished by 'image' vs text. No ambiguity.
Most tools follow a consistent 'prefix_verb' pattern (e.g., pdf_merge, pdf_split). The 'img_to_pdf' and 'pdf_to_img' break the verb pattern but are still clear and predictable.
10 tools is ideal for a PDF toolbox—neither too few nor too many. Each tool provides a distinct utility without overwhelming the agent.
Covers essential PDF operations (merge, split, compress, encrypt/decrypt, watermark, image conversion). Missing some advanced features like OCR or text extraction, but core workflows are well covered.