Reduce PDF file size by choosing presets for email, archival, or print quality, and save the smaller file to a new output path.
Make the file smaller. Presets: 'email' (smallest), 'archivage' (balanced), 'impression' (print quality).
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| path | Yes | ||
| output | Yes | ||
| preset | No | ||
| overwrite | No |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| result | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.2.2Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is clear without description support. The description adds preset tradeoffs (size vs. quality), but does not explain overwrite behavior, output handling, or whether compression is lossy.
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 definition is two short sentences, front-loaded with the core action and then the preset meanings. Every sentence adds useful information without filler.
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?
An output schema exists, so return values need not be described, and annotations cover safety. Still, for a four-parameter mutation tool, the description leaves path/output/overwrite semantics and sibling distinction unexplained.
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 0%, so the description must carry parameter meaning, but it only documents the 'preset' values. The required 'path' and 'output' parameters and the 'overwrite' flag receive no explanation in either schema or description.
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 states a clear action ('Make the file smaller') and lists preset behaviors, so the general purpose is immediately understandable. However, it does not specify the file type or distinguish this tool from nearby PDF siblings such as merge, split, or export.
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 offers no guidance on when to choose this tool over alternatives like export or create_pdf. Preset contexts (email, archivage, impression) help choose a mode, but they do not address tool selection.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.