Remove selected pages from a PDF by specifying ranges like "2,5-7". Ideal for cleaning or restructuring documents before saving to a new or overwritten file.
Delete pages, e.g. pages="2,5-7".
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| pages | Yes | ||
| password | No | ||
| overwrite | No | ||
| input_path | Yes | ||
| output_path | No |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden but only says 'delete'. It does not disclose that pages are permanently removed, whether the operation is in-place or requires an output_path, or how password-protected PDFs are handled — significant gaps for a destructive mutation tool.
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?
A single short sentence is front-loaded and waste-free, but it is under-specified rather than genuinely concise — the brevity comes at the cost of missing information.
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 5-parameter destructive tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is far too thin. It should cover the output_path/overwrite interplay and the password parameter, none of which are explained anywhere.
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% across 5 parameters. The description adds a useful page-range syntax example ('2,5-7') that the schema lacks, but leaves password, overwrite, input_path, and output_path entirely undocumented in both places.
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?
States a specific verb and resource ('Delete pages'), which is unambiguous against siblings like extract_pages or rearrange_pages. However, it does not explicitly differentiate itself from those adjacent tools, so it stops short of a 5.
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?
No when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, and no mention of when to prefer extract_pages or rearrange_pages. The agent must infer the use case purely from the verb.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.