Apdf — PDF Tracking & Analytics

Create PDF File

create-pdf-file

Create a PDF from the given HTML and return its hosted URL. Always runs asynchronously and returns a job id; poll "check-job-status" or provide "webhook_url" to receive a callback.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`html`	Yes	HTML to convert to a PDF.
`unit`	No	Unit for width/height/margins.
`scale`	No	Render scale, between 0.1 and 2.
`width`	No	Custom page width (requires height).
`footer`	No	Footer HTML template.
`format`	No	Page format.
`header`	No	Header HTML template.
`height`	No	Custom page height (requires width).
`margin_top`	No	Top margin.
`margin_left`	No	Left margin.
`orientation`	No	Page orientation.
`webhook_url`	No	Callback URL invoked when the async job finishes. Omit and poll "check-job-status" instead if no callback endpoint is available.
`margin_right`	No	Right margin.
`margin_bottom`	No	Bottom margin.

TDQS

A4.2/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

The description discloses async behavior, returning a job id, and callback mechanism. Annotations only have destructiveHint: false, and the description adds context about polling and webhooks, which is beyond annotations. No contradictions.

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

Conciseness5/5

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

Two sentences cover purpose and async behavior with no fluff. Every word earns its place.

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 14 parameters, no output schema, and async behavior, the description explains the key behavioral context. It could detail the job id return, but the parameter descriptions and sibling check-job-status tool fill gaps.

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 coverage is 100% with descriptions for all 14 parameters. The tool description does not add significant meaning beyond the schema; it only mentions HTML and async options. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 creates a PDF from HTML and returns a hosted URL. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like compress-pdf-file or merge-pdf-files, which handle different PDF operations.

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 explicitly states the tool runs asynchronously and guides the agent to either poll check-job-status or provide a webhook_url. It does not explicitly state when not to use it, but the guidance is clear for common usage.

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

All Apdf — PDF Tracking & Analytics tools Inspect

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

A3.8/5.0

Disambiguation5/5

Each tool targets a distinct operation (document management, PDF manipulation, automation, analytics, etc.) with clear boundaries, making it easy for an agent to select the correct one.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tool names follow a strict lowercase-with-hyphens pattern and use consistent verb-noun phrasing (e.g., 'create-document', 'list-documents', 'add-pdf-security'), ensuring predictability.

Tool Count2/5

At 45 tools, the server far exceeds the recommended 3-15 range for a well-scoped set. While the coverage is comprehensive, the high number may overwhelm agents and suggests insufficient consolidation.

Completeness5/5

The tool surface covers the full lifecycle of documents and PDFs—creation, retrieval, update, deletion, archiving, security, OCR, splitting, merging, automation, analytics, and more—with no obvious gaps.

Resources

Need Help?