extract_pdf_links

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

No annotations provided, and the description only states it extracts links. It does not disclose non-destructive behavior, performance characteristics, or potential side effects (e.g., file modification).

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 concise and includes structured Args and Returns sections. However, it is written in Chinese, which may reduce clarity for some agents.

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?

The description provides return value structure, compensating for no output schema. However, it lacks error handling, prerequisite conditions, or examples, leaving gaps for a moderately complex 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?

The description explains the purpose of both parameters: file_path as the full path and pages as an optional page range. This adds meaning beyond the schema's type definitions.

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 extracts all links (URLs and internal jumps) from a PDF, using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like extract_pdf_tables or extract_pdf_images.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., search_pdf_text, get_pdf_info) or exclusions. No mention of prerequisites or limitations.

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