Add password protection (encryption) to a PDF.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| password | Yes | Password to set on the PDF. | |
| source_url | No | Public URL of the PDF. | |
| file_base64 | No | Base64-encoded PDF. |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
The description adds no behavioral details beyond the annotations. Annotations indicate idempotentHint=true and openWorldHint=true, but the description fails to explain that the operation is idempotent (applying same password again yields same result) or that openWorldHint may imply external dependencies (e.g., fetching from URL). No mention of side effects like overwriting original file or performance.
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 sentence of 6 words, highly concise with no superfluous content. Every word is necessary, and the key action is front-loaded.
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 presence of annotations and an output schema, the description is minimally adequate. However, it lacks any mention of expected output format (even though output schema exists) or guidance on parameter precedence (e.g., if both source_url and file_base64 are provided, which one is used).
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 coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description does not add any additional meaning beyond the schema definitions for the three parameters (password required, source_url or file_base64 optional).
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's purpose: 'Add password protection (encryption) to a PDF.' It uses a specific verb ('Add'), resource ('PDF'), and method ('password protection/encryption'), distinguishing it clearly from sibling tools like unlock_pdf, merge_pdfs, etc.
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 provides no guidance on when or when not to use this tool, nor does it mention alternatives. Agents have no context about prerequisites (e.g., the PDF must be accessible via URL or base64) or situations where this tool is inappropriate.
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 clearly distinct purpose, covering different file operations (compress, convert, extract, merge, split, etc.) and billing management. No two tools overlap in functionality.
Most tool names follow a verb_noun pattern (compress_image, protect_pdf), but a few deviate (images_to_pdf, list_supported_conversions) causing minor inconsistency. The pattern is largely predictable.
17 tools is slightly above the typical well-scoped range, but still reasonable given the breadth of file manipulation and billing operations. Each tool serves a distinct need.
The file conversion and PDF manipulation operations are well-covered (compress, convert, extract, merge, split, protect, etc.). The billing tools are complete for subscription and credit management. Minor gaps exist, such as batch operations or image format conversions.