Add Page Numbers to PDF

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

Annotations already declare non-read-only, open-world, non-idempotent, non-destructive, but the description adds two facts annotations cannot: the file leaves the machine and is uploaded to conv2pdf, and the call consumes one conversion credit. It does not mention overwrite behavior or password handling beyond the schema, which keeps it short of a 5.

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 sentences, zero padding, and the core action is front-loaded before the operational caveat about upload and quota. Every 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?

With no output schema, the description does not explain the return value or where the result lands, though the schema covers output_path/default naming and non-overwrite. The quota and upload disclosure fills the biggest annotation gap; only result-shape detail is missing.

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% and every parameter (format, password, position, input_path, output_path) is documented in the schema, so the baseline is 3. The description adds no format, position, or password semantics beyond what is already there.

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 and resource ('adds/prints the page number ... of a PDF') with exact scope ('at the bottom of every page'), which separates it cleanly from siblings like add_watermark and rotate_pdf that also modify a PDF. An agent can identify the operation 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 description never says when to choose this over alternatives such as add_watermark (also stamps content on pages) or when it is inappropriate (e.g., already-numbered documents). Usage is only implied by the operation itself.

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