pdf_read_pages

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

With no annotations, the description fully discloses behavioral traits: a security warning about untrusted data, OCR caching behavior, and clarification that pdf_read_pages does not return render bytes (only an ID). This goes beyond basic expectations.

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 front-loaded with a security paragraph followed by a concise main sentence. Every sentence serves a purpose, though the security warning is somewhat lengthy. Overall well-structured for the complexity.

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 the output schema exists, the description does not need to specify return values. It covers security, page range syntax, OCR, and render_id behavior. It fully prepares the agent for correct invocation.

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%, so baseline is 3. The description adds value by explaining the page range format, OCR support, and the render_dpi parameter's limitation. It also clarifies that render bytes are not returned, which is not in the schema.

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 reads text, images, and tables from specific PDF pages. It highlights key features like page ranges and OCR, which distinguishes it from siblings like pdf_read_all, pdf_search, and pdf_render_pages.

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 usage for reading specific pages but does not explicitly state when to use versus alternatives like pdf_read_all or pdf_search. It lacks 'when not to use' guidance.

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