ocr-pdf

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only mentions the outcome ('make it searchable') but does not reveal whether the original file is modified, what output is generated, or any side effects or permissions needed. This is minimal behavioral transparency.

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 a single, clear sentence that immediately conveys the core action, resource, and purpose. There is no wasted verbiage, and it is well-structured for quick parsing by an agent.

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 that this is a tool with four parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is insufficiently complete. It does not explain what the tool returns (e.g., a new searchable PDF or a task ID), how the outputDir/outputFilename parameters affect behavior, or any prerequisites. The lack of behavioral context makes it hard for an agent to use the tool correctly without additional assumptions.

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 schema has 100% coverage with clear descriptions for all four parameters, giving a baseline of 3. The tool description adds value by specifying that the file must be a 'scanned PDF', which narrows the file parameter beyond the schema's generic 'PDF file path or URL' description. This is a meaningful semantic addition.

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's function with a specific verb ('Perform OCR') and resource ('scanned PDF'), and explains the purpose ('to make it searchable'). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like extract-text, which is for digital PDFs, by explicitly targeting scanned documents.

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 implies the tool should be used for scanned PDFs that need to be searchable, but it does not explicitly compare to alternatives like extract-text or state when not to use it. The context of 'scanned PDF' provides implied usage guidance, but no explicit exclusions or alternative references.

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