Skip to main content
Glama
dambuchs

redact-pdf-mcp

by dambuchs
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Hybrid

Download a redacted PDF

download_redacted
Destructive

Retrieve the completed redacted PDF for a document by providing its document id. Use after redaction status is 'redacted' to save the output file locally.

Instructions

Download the finished redacted PDF for one document, using the document id from redact_pdf or get_job_status.

Only works once that document reports status "redacted". Under the default "ephemeral" retention the original is already gone; the redacted output is kept for the account's retention window (14 days by default) and then deleted.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
document_idYesThe document id, from the documents list of redact_pdf or get_job_status.
output_pathNoWhere to write the redacted PDF on this machine. Defaults to the input path with a "-redacted" suffix, next to the original. Output is always a PDF, so an image input produces a .pdf file. The original file is never modified.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv0.2.1
    • changedInput schema / properties / output_path / description
      Previous value: -"Where to write the redacted PDF on this machine. Defaults to the input path with a \"-redacted\" suffix, next to the original. The original file is never modified."New value: +"Where to write the redacted PDF on this machine. Defaults to the input path with a \"-redacted\" suffix, next to the original. Output is always a PDF, so an image input produces a .pdf file. The original file is never modified."
  2. First observedv1.0.0

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

The description goes well beyond the annotations by explaining retention behavior: the original is already gone under ephemeral retention, the redacted output is kept for 14 days by default and then deleted, and the original file is never modified. It also discloses that output is always PDF even for image inputs. This gives the agent important behavioral context beyond readOnlyHint and destructiveHint.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is compact and front-loaded with the action and object. Every sentence earns its place: purpose, precondition, retention, output format, and non-modification of the original. There is no filler or repetition.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a tool with two well-documented parameters and no output schema, the description covers everything needed to call it correctly: source of the id, required status, retention window, output_path default, output format, and safety about the original file. No critical gap remains.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema already fully documents document_id and output_path. The description adds no new parameter-level semantics beyond what the schema provides, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Download the finished redacted PDF for one document.' It also tells the agent where the document id comes from (redact_pdf or get_job_status), which clearly distinguishes this from sibling tools that create or check redaction jobs.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description explicitly states the precondition: 'Only works once that document reports status "redacted".' It also points to redact_pdf or get_job_status as the source for the document id. It does not explicitly name alternatives or tell the agent what to do when the status is not redacted, but the usage context is clear enough.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools