Skip to main content
Glama
pdfdotco

PDF.co MCP Server

Official
by pdfdotco
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Remote

email_to_pdf

Convert MSG or EML email files into PDF documents, with options to embed or convert attachments, set page size, orientation, and margins.

Instructions

Convert email to PDF.
Ref: https://developer.pdf.co/api/pdf-from-email.md

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
urlYesURL to the source file (MSG, EML). Supports publicly accessible links including Google Drive, Dropbox, PDF.co Built-In Files Storage. Use 'upload_file' tool to upload local files.
api_keyNoPDF.co API key. If not provided, will use X_API_KEY environment variable. (Optional)
marginsNoSet to CSS style margins like 10px, 5mm, 5in for all sides or 5px 5px 5px 5px (the order of margins is top, right, bottom, left). (Optional)
profilesNoExtra engine options for this endpoint as a JSON object encoded in a string. The options differ per endpoint; see https://developer.pdf.co/api/profiles. (Optional)
paperSizeNoA4 is set by default. Can be Letter, Legal, Tabloid, Ledger, A0, A1, A2, A3, A4, A5, A6 or a custom size. Custom size can be set in px (pixels), mm or in (inches) with width and height separated by space like this: 200 300, 200px 300px, 200mm 300mm, 20cm 30cm or 6in 8in. (Optional)
expirationNoLifetime of the output link in minutes; the output file is deleted afterwards. API default is 60; the maximum depends on the plan. (Optional)
orientationNoSet to Portrait or Landscape. Portrait is set by default. (Optional)
embedAttachmentsNoSet to true to automatically embeds all attachments from original input email MSG or EML files into the final output PDF. Set it to false if you don’t want to embed attachments so it will convert only the body of the input email. True by default.
convertAttachmentsNoSet to false if you don’t want to convert attachments from the original email and want to embed them as original files (as embedded PDF attachments). Converts attachments that are supported by the PDF.co API (DOC, DOCx, HTML, PNG, JPG etc.) into PDF format and then merges into output final PDF. Non-supported file types are added as PDF attachments (Adobe Reader or another viewer may be required to view PDF attachments).

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changedv0.0.11
    • addedInput schema / properties / expiration
      Added value: +{
+  "anyOf": [
+    {
+      "type": "integer"
+    },
+    {
+      "type": "null"
+    }
+  ],
+  "default": null,
+  "description": "Lifetime of the output link in minutes; the output file is deleted afterwards. API default is 60; the maximum depends on the plan. (Optional)",
+  "title": "Expiration"
+}
    • addedInput schema / properties / profiles
      Added value: +{
+  "default": "",
+  "description": "Extra engine options for this endpoint as a JSON object encoded in a string. The options differ per endpoint; see https://developer.pdf.co/api/profiles. (Optional)",
+  "title": "Profiles",
+  "type": "string"
+}
  2. First observed

TDQS

C2.8/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations exist, so the description carries the full behavioral burden, yet it only adds a documentation link. It says nothing about API key requirements, that output is a temporary link controlled by expiration, or whether the conversion is synchronous or a job that must be polled.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness3/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Extremely short and front-loaded, but the brevity crosses into under-specification for a 9-parameter conversion tool; the second line is a bare external link that an agent may not be able to fetch.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness2/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a 9-parameter, no-annotation, no-output-schema tool in an async-job API, the description omits return shape, job handling, and authentication. The schema covers parameters but the description leaves the surrounding workflow unknown.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so parameters like embedAttachments, convertAttachments, paperSize and expiration are already fully documented. The description adds no parameter meaning beyond the schema, which is the baseline 3 case.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb and resource: 'Convert email to PDF'. The resource (email) implicitly separates it from document_to_pdf or webpage_to_pdf, but no sibling is named and the accepted email formats (MSG/EML) are only in the schema.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

No guidance on when to use this instead of document_to_pdf or html_to_pdf, no mention that local files must first go through upload_file, and no note about asynchronous job polling via get_job_check/wait_job_completion.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools