pdf_stamp

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of disclosure. It mentions rotation for authenticity but does not disclose whether the operation is destructive, if it overwrites existing content, or any permissions needed. The output behavior beyond applying the stamp is not described.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the verb and resource, and contains no redundant information. Every sentence adds value.

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 8 parameters and no output schema, the description covers main behavior and styling. However, it omits details on default page behavior (all pages) and how customText interacts with CUSTOM type, which are partially covered by the schema.

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 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds context about the stamp's visual style (bordered rectangle, rotation) which aids understanding of parameters like rotation and position, but does not add per-parameter details beyond what the schema already provides.

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 applies a styled business stamp to PDF pages, specifying it uses pre-configured styles or custom ones, and describes the visual effect (bordered rectangle with text, slightly rotated). This distinguishes it from siblings like pdf_add_image or pdf_add_text.

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 use for stamping vs. other annotations via mention of pre-configured styles, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives like pdf_watermark or pdf_sign, nor provide criteria for choosing between stamp types.

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