Render PDF pages as images to view figures, plots, gels, and layout.
Render pages of an item's PDF as images so figures, plots, gels and layout are visible - not just extracted text.
item_key: parent item key or attachment key pages: '1-4', '2,5,7', '1-3,8' (1-based). Max 8 pages per call. dpi: 100 for a quick look, 150 default, 200+ for dense figures.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| dpi | No | ||
| pages | No | 1-4 | |
| item_key | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are present, so the description carries the burden. It discloses operational limitations like 'Max 8 pages per call' and is a read-only operation by nature, but does not explicitly state it makes no modifications or what side effects, if any, exist.
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?
The description is compact, with a clear one-sentence purpose followed by a structured parameter breakdown. Every sentence adds value without redundancy.
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?
Given there is no output schema, the description is complete: it explains what the tool does, parameter semantics, and call limits. No essential operational information is missing.
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?
Although the schema itself has no descriptions, the tool description thoroughly explains each parameter (item_key, pages, dpi) with formats and default values, fully compensating for the 0% schema coverage.
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?
Clearly states the tool's function: rendering PDF pages as images to make visual content visible, contrasting with text extraction. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like zotero_pdf_text.
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?
The description implies when to use it (when visual elements like figures and layout are needed) and provides concrete parameter advice (page ranges, DPI choices). The explicit contrast with 'not just extracted text' gives clear usage direction.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.