ocr_pdf

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

Annotations only mark readOnlyHint and openWorldHint. The description adds critical behavioral info: local binary dependency, error behavior (refuses by name without tesseract), network isolation, and accuracy warning (misreads numbers). No contradiction with annotations.

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?

Three sentences pack maximum value: first gives core purpose and constraint, second covers dependencies and privacy, third provides guidance and warning. No wasted words; each sentence earns its place.

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 no output schema, the description covers purpose, constraints, prerequisites, privacy, and a usage tip. However, it omits the return type (text) and does not fully substitute for missing schema descriptions. Still, it's largely complete for an experienced agent.

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 0% (no parameter descriptions). The description implies 'pages' via 'up to 10 per call' and path via PDF context, but does not explain dpi, lang, or default behavior. With 0% coverage, description should have detailed each parameter's role.

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 explicitly states the verb 'OCR', the resource 'scanned PDF pages', and the limit 'up to 10 per call'. It distinguishes from sibling tools like pdf_extract_text and ocr_image by implying use case (scanned vs. native PDFs) and referencing pdf_info for pagination.

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 tells when to use ('Use pdf_info first to find which pages need OCR'), clarifies prerequisites (tesseract installed), and implies when not to use (e.g., if no installation, use other tools). It also notes that nothing reaches the network, aiding security decisions.

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