Skip to main content
Glama
pdfdotco

PDF.co MCP Server

Official
by pdfdotco
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Remote

pdf_to_html

Convert PDFs or scanned images to HTML; apply OCR language settings and page selections to make document content editable and web-ready.

Instructions

Convert PDF and scanned images to HTML format.
Ref: https://developer.pdf.co/api/pdf-to-html.md

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
urlYesURL to the source file. Supports publicly accessible links including Google Drive, Dropbox, PDF.co Built-In Files Storage. Use 'upload_file' tool to upload local files.
langNoLanguage for OCR for scanned documents. Default is 'eng'. See PDF.co docs for supported languages. (Optional, Default: 'eng')eng
nameNoFile name for the generated output. (Optional)
rectNoDefines coordinates for extraction (e.g., '51.8,114.8,235.5,204.0'). (Optional)
pagesNoComma-separated page indices (e.g., '0, 1, 2-' or '1, 3-7'). Use '!' for inverted page numbers (e.g., '!0' for last page). Processes all pages if None. (Optional)
unwrapNoUnwrap lines into a single line within table cells when lineGrouping is enabled. Must be true or false. (Optional)
api_keyNoPDF.co API key. If not provided, will use X_API_KEY environment variable. (Optional)
passwordNoPassword of the PDF file. (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)
expirationNoLifetime of the output link in minutes; the output file is deleted afterwards. API default is 60; the maximum depends on the plan. (Optional)
httppasswordNoHTTP auth password if required to access source url. (Optional)
httpusernameNoHTTP auth user name if required to access source url. (Optional)
line_groupingNoEnables line grouping within table cells when set to '1'. (Optional)0

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

C2.9/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden, yet it discloses nothing about what is returned (an output link vs. inline HTML), expiration semantics, OCR requirements for scanned inputs, or API-key/auth expectations. The only added context is that scanned images are handled, which implies OCR but doesn't explain it.

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

Conciseness4/5

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

Two short sentences, front-loaded with the operation and followed by a documentation reference; no filler. It is on the sparse side for a 13-parameter tool, but nothing present is wasted.

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 13-parameter conversion tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description should at minimum say what the tool returns and how OCR/scanned input behaves. Neither is covered, leaving the agent unable to predict the result shape or handle scanned documents correctly without reading external docs.

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 all 13 parameters are already documented in the schema, establishing a baseline of 3. The description adds no extra meaning about any parameter — notably it does not connect the "scanned images" claim to the lang/OCR parameter, which would have been genuinely useful.

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 PDF and scanned images to HTML format"), and the target format implicitly distinguishes it from siblings like pdf_to_text, pdf_to_json, and pdf_to_image. It does not name any sibling explicitly, so the differentiation is left to inference.

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?

There is no statement of when to use this tool versus the many other PDF conversion siblings, and no prerequisites or exclusions. Usage is only implied by the tool name and the conversion verb; the agent must infer routing from the output-format keyword alone.

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