Split PDF

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 discloses that each range becomes one output file written into an output directory. However, it does not specify whether files are overwritten, whether the directory is created if missing, or any permission requirements. This is adequate but lacks deeper behavioral context.

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 two sentences and front-loaded with the core purpose: 'Split a PDF into multiple PDFs by page ranges.' Every word is informative and no redundancy is present. It is optimally concise.

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 no output schema, the description should at least hint at what the tool returns. It mentions that output files are written but does not specify if the tool returns file paths, a success message, or nothing. For a moderately complex tool with 4 parameters, this omission leaves the agent uncertain about the response.

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 adds minimal meaning beyond the schema, merely reiterating that ranges produce output files. The schema already describes all four parameters clearly, including examples for ranges and defaults for basename and outputDir.

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 'Split a PDF into multiple PDFs by page ranges,' which includes a specific verb (split) and resource (PDF). It distinguishes from sibling tools like merge (combining), extract_images (image extraction), and extract_text (text extraction).

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 clear context for when to use this tool (splitting a PDF by page ranges) but does not explicitly mention when not to use it or identify alternative tools for similar tasks. It is sufficient for an agent to infer appropriate usage, but explicit exclusions would strengthen it.

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