Paperboy

Official

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

render_pages

DestructiveIdempotent

Convert PDF pages to PNG or JPEG images, one file per page, with optional page ranges, DPI settings, and password support for protected documents.

Instructions

Save pages as PNG or JPEG image files, one per page (all pages if pages omitted).

dpi: 36-600 (default 150). format: "png" (default) or "jpeg". Files are named _p001.png in output_dir (default: a _pages folder next to the PDF). Copy-protected PDFs need their owner password.

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": "render_pages"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Default
`dpi`	No
`pages`	No
`format`	No	png
`password`	No
`overwrite`	No
`input_path`	Yes
`output_dir`	No

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`dpi`	Yes
`files`	Yes
`pages`	Yes
`format`	Yes
`output_dir`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Addedv0.1.1Nov 12, 2026

TDQS

A3.6/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

The annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=true, and the description usefully adds the output file naming scheme, the default output directory, and the owner-password requirement. It does not address the overwrite risk that the destructive annotation implies (what happens if `<name>_p001.png` already exists), which is the one behavior an agent most needs before writing files.

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?

The purpose sentence is front-loaded and the remaining text is a compact, scannable parameter digest with no filler. Density is high but every line contributes; slightly more structure (e.g. a note on overwrite) would round it out.

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

Completeness4/5

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

The tool has an output schema, so return values need not be explained, and the description covers rendering granularity, format, resolution, destination, and authentication. For a 7-parameter destructive write tool, the only real gap is overwrite behavior and whether input_path accepts non-PDF or directory inputs.

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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description carries the parameter burden, and it does so well: dpi range and default, format values and default, pages semantics, output_dir default, and the password/"ask" convention. Only overwrite is left completely undefined, and input_path is only implied rather than described, so it is not a full compensation.

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?

The description states a specific verb and resource ("Save pages as PNG or JPEG image files, one per page") and disambiguates rendering from page selection via the "all pages if pages omitted" clause. It does not distinguish itself from plausible siblings such as extract_images or view_pages, which both deal with the same PDF pages, so it falls 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.

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

It gives concrete usage context: when pages is omitted, all pages are rendered; copy-protected PDFs require the owner password; any password may be set to "ask" so the secret never enters the chat. There is no explicit statement of when to prefer this tool over image-extraction or page-viewing alternatives, so guidance is implied by the output description rather than stated as routing.

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