Skip to main content
Glama
AvatarGanymede

MinerU Document to Markdown MCP Server

create_parse_task

Submit a document URL for async conversion to markdown. Returns a task ID to track progress. Supports PDF, DOCX, PPTX, images, and HTML.

Instructions

Create a document parsing task on MinerU API. Purpose: Submit a document URL for async conversion. Returns task_id for tracking. Constraints: Supported formats: PDF, DOC, DOCX, PPT, PPTX, PNG, JPG, JPEG, HTML only. Side effect: Calls MinerU API.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
urlYesURL of the document to parse. Supported formats: PDF, DOC, DOCX, PPT, PPTX, PNG, JPG, JPEG, HTML
is_ocrNoEnable OCR (auto-enabled for images)
enable_tableNoEnable table recognition
model_versionNoModel version (auto-detected: 'vlm' for most, 'MinerU-HTML' for HTML)vlm
enable_formulaNoEnable formula recognition
Behavior3/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the behavioral burden. It discloses that it calls MinerU API and returns a task_id for tracking, but omits details like rate limits, authentication needs, or idempotency.

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 description is concise, front-loaded with the primary action, and every sentence adds value. No unnecessary words.

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 adequately covers the purpose, side effect, constraints, and return value (task_id) despite lacking an output schema. Minor omission: no mention of error handling.

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 description coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds no new parameter meaning beyond repeating supported formats; it does not compensate for any gaps.

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 document parsing task on MinerU API, with a specific verb 'Create' and resource 'parse task'. It distinguishes from siblings (get_task_status, download_result, etc.) by focusing on submission for async conversion.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description implies this is the entry point for document conversion via async parsing, but does not explicitly state when to use it versus alternatives. It lacks when-not or exclusion guidance.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/AvatarGanymede/MinerU-MCP'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server