Server Quality Checklist

Tool Scores

• list_conversionsA
  3.5/5.0
  Behavior2/5

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

  No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It only states the basic operation (listing) but does not disclose that it is a safe, read-only operation, nor any potential side effects, authentication needs, or rate limits. The agent must infer it is non-destructive from context.

  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 a single, clear sentence that is front-loaded with the core purpose. No extraneous words or information.

  Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

  Completeness3/5

  Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

  Given one optional parameter, no output schema, and sibling tools, the description is adequate but could be more complete. It does not specify the format of the returned list (e.g., array of objects with conversion details), which might help the agent anticipate output. However, for a simple listing tool, it suffices.

  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 a well-described parameter. The description adds that the filter is optional, which is already implied by the parameter being not required. The schema's description of 'from_format' with examples already provides the meaning, so the description adds only marginal value, aligning with the baseline.

  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 verb 'list' and the resource 'conversions and tools GuruPDF supports', with an optional filter by input format. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like convert_file, check_credits, and get_status by focusing on listing available capabilities.

  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 usage for discovering supported conversions and tools, optionally filtering by input format. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool over siblings, nor when to avoid it (e.g., for actual conversion, use convert_file).

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

• check_creditsA
  3.8/5.0
  Behavior3/5

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

  With no annotations, the description carries the burden. It implies a read-only operation but does not explicitly state that it is non-destructive or safe to call repeatedly. No side effects are disclosed, though none are expected.

  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 a single sentence with no wasted words. It is front-loaded with the action and immediately conveys the tool's purpose.

  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?

  Given zero parameters and no output schema, the description provides sufficient context for a simple query tool. It explains both the information shown and actionable guidance. Minor room for improvement: could mention response format or error states.

  Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

  Parameters4/5

  Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

  No parameters exist in the schema, so the description does not need to explain them. It adds value by indicating what information will be returned (credits left and how to get more), which goes beyond the bare schema.

  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 shows remaining GuruPDF credits and provides guidance on obtaining more. It uses specific verb 'show' and resource 'credits', distinguishing it from sibling tools like convert_file or get_status.

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

  Usage Guidelines2/5

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

  No guidance is given on when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_status or list_conversions. The description does not mention prerequisites (e.g., authentication) or typical use cases.

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

• get_statusA
  4/5.0
  Behavior3/5

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

  No annotations provided. Description mentions download on completion but omits behavior when job is not finished, error handling, file overwrite policy, or authentication needs.

  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?

  Single sentence with two clauses, no wasted words. Concise and efficient.

  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?

  Given simple tool with 2 params and full schema coverage, description covers core functionality. Omits in-progress status behavior and edge cases, but adequate for basic use.

  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 has 100% description coverage. Description adds minimal value (e.g., uuid from convert_file, default of output_dir). Baseline 3 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?

  Description clearly states the tool checks a conversion job by uuid and downloads result if finished. It distinguishes from siblings: convert_file creates jobs, list_conversions lists, check_credits checks credits.

  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?

  Description implies usage after convert_file to check and download. No explicit when-not-to-use or alternatives, but context is clear.

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

• convert_fileA
  4.4/5.0
  Behavior4/5

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

  Discloses key behaviors: saves result next to input, returns path, supports sync and async (wait parameter). No annotations exist, so description carries burden; minor gaps like error handling.

  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 concise sentences front-loaded with purpose, covering all key aspects without redundancy. Every sentence is informative.

  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?

  Covers core functionality, input/output, and async variant. No output schema, so path return is noted. Lacks detail on error states but adequate for typical use.

  Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

  Parameters4/5

  Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

  Schema coverage is 100%, but description adds value: explains input types (local/URL, multiple for merge), to format vs tool slug, and options structure. Enhances schema.

  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 converts/processes files with GuruPDF, covering 100+ formats and PDF tools, and distinguishes from siblings like list_conversions (lists conversions) and get_status (checks job status).

  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?

  Provides clear context for when to use (convert files or run PDF tools) and implies when not to use (e.g., use get_status for job tracking). Could be more explicit about alternatives but is sufficient.

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