ReMCP

Pdf Merge

pdf_merge

Destructive

Use this to combine multiple user-selected local PDF files into a new output PDF in specified order. Check every input and destination; this creates an output file but does not edit the source pages.

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`path`	No	Permitted local filesystem path.
`paths`	Yes	List of permitted local filesystem paths.
`device`	Yes	ReMCP device id returned by list_devices. Required for every device operation.
`output`	Yes	Optional permitted output path; when omitted the tool may update the input according to its action.
`pattern`	No	Output filename pattern where supported.
`output_dir`	No	Permitted directory for generated output files.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`data`	No	PDF action structured result for pdf_action. Stable fields are declared explicitly; platform-specific fields may be added. Large results may return truncated/bytes/preview instead of the full payload.
`text`	Yes	Concise human-readable result of the tool call.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedOct 19, 2026

changedInput schema / required

Previous value: -[
-  "device",
-  "paths"
-]New value: +[
+  "device",
+  "paths",
+  "output"
+]

AddedOct 19, 2026

TDQS

A4.4/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

The description adds critical behavioral context beyond the 'destructiveHint' annotation by explicitly stating that the tool 'does not edit the source pages.' This manages user expectations regarding the integrity of the input files, which is vital for a mutation tool.

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?

The two sentences are highly efficient, with the first establishing the core function and the second providing a crucial operational guarantee regarding source file safety. No part of the description is superfluous.

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?

The description is highly complete regarding the tool's function and safety profile. Given that the input schema is comprehensive and the annotations cover the safety flags, the description successfully adds the missing behavioral nuance.

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?

The schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema defines all parameters well. The description mentions 'specified order,' which relates to the `paths` array, but provides no new semantic meaning beyond what the schema already dictates about the input structure. The baseline score of 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 uses the specific verb 'combine' and clearly defines the resource (local PDF files) and the output format (new output PDF). It is immediately clear how this tool functions in the context of file manipulation.

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 tool specifies that the files are combined 'in specified order' and clarifies that it produces a new file rather than modifying inputs. While it doesn't explicitly name sibling tools, the functional description provides clear context on when to use this merge vs. split or rename tools.

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

All ReMCP tools Inspect

Try in Browser

One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources

Need Help?