Edit PDF

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full disclosure burden. It usefully discloses that compress is lossless and clarifies protect/unlock password semantics, but it omits mutation hazards (overwriting outputs, encrypting existing files) and any permission or error behavior. It adds real but partial behavioral context.

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?

Two short sentences, front-loaded with the operation list, with the indexing caveat placed at the end. No 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?

For an 11-parameter multi-verb tool with no output schema, the description covers the operation set and indexing convention but never maps which parameters belong to which op (beyond a few schema hints) or describes output/overwrite behavior, leaving gaps an agent must infer from 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 description coverage is already 91%, so the baseline is 3. The statement 'Page numbers are 1-based' is a genuine addition that applies across at/order/pages and is not documented anywhere in the schema, which lifts it above baseline.

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?

Names a specific verb and resource ('Edit PDF files') and enumerates all nine supported operations, so an agent can immediately tell it apart from pdf_info and doc_convert 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?

The op list implies when each mode applies, but there is no explicit when-to-use guidance relative to siblings (pdf_info, doc_convert) and no note that non-merge ops take exactly one input file (that fact lives only in the schema). Usage is implied rather than stated.

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