Paperboy

Official

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

convert_to_pdfa

DestructiveIdempotent

Create a PDF/A-2b archival copy for long-term compliance by adding sRGB metadata, removing forbidden actions, and preserving page appearance; validate with veraPDF when available.

Instructions

Write a PDF/A-2b copy (default "_pdfa.pdf") for long-term archiving, as courts, governments and archives often require. Pages are never redrawn: it adds an sRGB colour profile and PDF/A metadata, and removes what PDF/A forbids (scripts and other actions, attached files, encryption, annotations that are hidden or have no appearance; form fields lose their actions). changes lists what it changed.

If veraPDF is installed, the copy is checked against PDF/A-2b and written only if it passes (validated=true); without it, the copy is written unchecked (validated=false: it may not fully conform) unless a problem is found. It can't fix what would change how pages look: text in fonts that aren't embedded (common in files from simple PDF generators; re-export with fonts embedded), CMYK colour, pages larger than 200 inches; such PDFs are refused with the reasons and nothing is written. The copy has no password: a protected PDF needs its owner password if it restricts anything. Signed PDFs are refused.

Any password argument can be "ask": the user then types it on a local page, so it never passes through the chat.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "input_path": "<input_path>"
    },
    "name": "convert_to_pdfa"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`password`	No
`overwrite`	No
`input_path`	Yes
`output_path`	No

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`output`	Yes
`changes`	Yes
`standard`	Yes
`validated`	Yes
`validator`	Yes
`protection_removed`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Addedv0.1.1Nov 12, 2026

TDQS

A4.3/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Goes well beyond the annotations: it enumerates exactly what is stripped (scripts, actions, attachments, encryption, hidden annotations, form-field actions), what is added (sRGB profile, PDF/A metadata), the veraPDF validation gate and the validated flag semantics. It also discloses refusal cases with reasons, that nothing is written on refusal, and password handling — far more than destructiveHint/idempotentHint convey alone.

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?

Front-loads what the tool produces before moving to validation, then failure modes, then password handling — a logical order. It is dense with long parenthetical lists, but nearly every clause carries operational information; only the repeated spelling-out of refusal consequences could be trimmed.

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

Completeness5/5

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

For a mutation tool with a 4-param schema and an existing output schema, it covers the gaps that matter: what changes, what gets destroyed, when nothing is written, and how validation status is reported. An agent has everything needed to decide to call it and to interpret failures.

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

Parameters4/5

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

With 0% schema description coverage the description must carry the params: it supplies the default output name pattern for output_path, the special "ask" value for password, and the security rationale for it. The 'overwrite' parameter is never mentioned, leaving one of four parameters undocumented.

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 ('Write a PDF/A-2b copy') plus the purpose (long-term archiving), which is concrete enough to separate it from convert_to_pdf. It never names a sibling or says how it differs from plain PDF conversion, so it stops short of full differentiation.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

Gives a clear usage context ('as courts, governments and archives often require') and detailed conditions under which the tool refuses to run (unembedded fonts, CMYK, oversized pages, signed PDFs). It does not explicitly state when to prefer convert_to_pdf over this tool, but the archival framing is strong guidance.

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