Split / extract PDF pages

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

Beyond annotations (idempotent, not destructive), the description adds that execution is local and files are never sent anywhere, addressing privacy/security. It also describes output suffix behavior in range mode with multiple groups. This adds significant value beyond annotations.

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?

Two concise sentences covering purpose, usage, and privacy. No redundant words. The key information is front-loaded: 'Split a PDF by 1-based page ranges... or extract specific pages'. Every sentence earns its place.

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 the lack of an output schema, the description covers input source, output paths, behavior for both modes, and the local execution guarantee. It is sufficiently complete for an agent to invoke correctly, including the mutual exclusivity of parameters.

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?

While the schema covers all parameters with descriptions, the description adds critical usage semantics: that exactly one of pages/ranges must be provided, how outputs are named (suffixes in range mode), and the format of the strings. This goes beyond the schema's basic type descriptions.

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 tool splits PDF by page ranges or extracts specific pages, with concrete examples ("1-3,5", "1,3,5"). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like pdf_merge (which combines PDFs) and pdf_page_count (which only counts pages).

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 explicitly states 'Provide exactly one of `ranges` or `pages`', giving clear usage direction. It explains the difference between range mode (one output per group) and pages mode (single output). However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use this tool (e.g., for simple page extraction without ranges) beyond the constraint.

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