make-document-publicMake a document public by its public id, so it can be viewed without a recipient link. Reversible via "make-document-private".
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| doc_id | Yes | The public id of the document to make public. |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
The description adds the key behavioral insight that the action is reversible, which complements the annotations (idempotentHint: true, destructiveHint: true). However, it does not discuss permissions, side effects, or other behaviors beyond the annotations.
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 that efficiently convey the action, how to perform it, the result, and reversibility. Every sentence adds value.
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 tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description fully explains the effect and how to reverse it, meeting all contextual needs.
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% for the single parameter (doc_id). The description does not add significant new meaning beyond the schema's description of the parameter.
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?
Clearly states the action (make document public), the method (by public id), and the effect (viewable without recipient link). Distinguishes from siblings by mentioning reversibility via 'make-document-private'.
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 clear context for when to use this tool (to make a document publicly viewable) and mentions the reverse tool (make-document-private). Does not explicitly exclude alternatives like activate-document-link, but the purpose is sufficiently clear.
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 operation (document management, PDF manipulation, automation, analytics, etc.) with clear boundaries, making it easy for an agent to select the correct one.
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.
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.
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.