Split PDF

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=false, so safety is partly covered. The description adds genuinely useful context beyond that: the input is not modified, existing files are never overwritten, and the return value is a list of files (important since there is no output schema). No auth or size-limit caveats, but the important destructive-behavior questions are answered.

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 short sentences, front-loaded with what the tool does, then safety behavior, then the sibling alternative. No filler and no redundancy with the schema.

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?

Covers the operation, the chunking control, the output location and format, the non-destructive/no-overwrite guarantee, and the competing tool. With only 4 simple parameters and no output schema, nothing an agent needs to call this correctly 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%, so the baseline is 3, and the description earns above that by interpreting pages_per_file ('N pages each, 1 = one file per page') and describing the output folder destination. It does not add format detail for input/password, which the schema already handles.

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 (split a PDF), the exact chunking semantics (N pages each, 1 = one file per page), and where output lands. It also differentiates itself from the sibling extract_pdf_pages, so an agent can route between them without reading other schemas.

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?

Explicitly names the alternative tool and the condition that selects it: 'To keep a custom page range as one file use extract_pdf_pages instead.' That is a concrete when-not-to-use rule, not implied guidance.

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