Extract pages into one PDF

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

The description adds significant behavioral context beyond annotations: output is a fresh self-contained PDF, signatures/AcroForm dropped, URI links kept unless dropAnnotations=true, encrypted sources rejected. This covers mutation details and limitations.

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?

Three sentences: first gives main purpose, second adds technical details, third provides alternative. No unnecessary words, front-loaded with the core action.

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 6 parameters (2 required) and an output schema, the description covers key behavior, encryption constraint, and usage alternative. It lacks explicit guidance on output paths or size limits, but output schema may cover return values. Fairly complete for a non-trivial tool.

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 67%, so baseline is 3. The description adds clarification for `pages` (0-based, order matters) and `dropAnnotations` (what happens when true/false). However, it doesn't add meaning for `outputMode` or `maxOutputSizeBytes`, which are well-described in schema.

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 verb 'extract', the resource 'pages from a PDF', and the key outcome 'into a SINGLE new document'. It also distinguishes itself from the sibling tool `split_pdf` by specifying when to use each.

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?

Explicitly tells when to use this tool versus `split_pdf`: 'Use split_pdf instead when you need several output PDFs (one per range).' Also mentions that encrypted sources are rejected, providing clear constraints.

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