create_pdf

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden and does well: it discloses on-device rendering, that it writes the PDF, returns the path, and that nothing is uploaded. It could be even more explicit about overwrite behavior or error handling, but core side effects and privacy are covered.

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?

Four sentences and front-loaded with purpose. The phrase 'not like a script's best guess' is charming but non-essential; still, the description is compact and readable.

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 a PDF-generation tool with a rich schema and output schema, the description covers input modes, privacy, output destination, and alternative tooling. It does not describe failure scenarios or path validation, but that is acceptable at this complexity level.

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?

Input schema covers all 6 parameters with descriptions (100% coverage), so the baseline is 3. The description lightly reinforces roles of source, sourcePath, and outputPath, but adds no new meaning beyond schema for css, title, or format.

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 opens with a specific verb ('Generate'), names the resource ('PDF'), and specifies input formats (Markdown or raw HTML). It also distinguishes from sibling redaction/verification tools by clearly positioning this as a PDF creation tool.

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 explicitly says 'Use this instead of writing a one-off reportlab/LaTeX/pandoc script,' giving clear guidance on when to prefer it. It also tells the user exactly how to invoke it: provide source/sourcePath and outputPath.

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