pdfpeek: resize PDF pages

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

Far beyond the annotations: discloses that active content (JavaScript, actions, embedded files, XFA) is always removed, links/form fields move with the page, scaled not reflowed, encrypted input returns 422, oversized output 413, ~78 s timeout 503, pricing/free-tier, and the untrusted-output caution. The readOnlyHint=false / idempotentHint=true profile is consistent with a deterministic transformation.

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?

Front-loads the purpose and the sibling disambiguation before operational details, and every clause carries real information (modes, limits, errors, price). It is dense and slightly run-on in the middle, but no sentence is filler.

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?

With an output schema present, return values need no explanation; the description still covers error codes, output modality, concurrency/limits, pricing and a safety note. For a 10-param, open-world mutation tool this is essentially complete.

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 description coverage is 100%, so mode, unit, size, width/height and output are already fully documented in the schema; the description largely restates them. It does add marginal cross-parameter framing (size=custom driving width/height, output url keeping base64 out of context), but not enough to exceed the baseline set by a fully-covered 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?

States a specific verb+resource (resize PDF pages) with the supported target sizes, and explicitly distinguishes itself from the sibling pdf_crop for margin trimming. An agent can pick it apart from pdf_compress/pdf_rotate without opening the schema.

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?

It names the alternative tool and the exact condition that selects it ('to trim margins use pdf_crop'), which is precise routing guidance. It stops short of broader when/when-not context (e.g., relationship to pdf_compress or when to prefer image_resize on rasterized output), so it's clear context rather than full exclusions.

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