Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
mcp-web-print-pdf

mcp-web-print-pdf

by weixiaoyi
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Local

batchPrint

Submit multiple print jobs at once for HTML, web pages, PDFs, and images using URLs or Base64 data; enable dry_run to preview results without printing.

Instructions

一次提交多个打印任务（HTML / 网页 / PDF / 图片，URL 或 Base64 混合）。默认出纸；dry_run: true 只预览

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": {
      "tasks": "<tasks>"
    },
    "name": "batchPrint"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
tasksYes任务列表，每项含 type 与对应内容字段
copiesNo便捷参数：份数
dry_runNofalse（默认）= 真正出纸；true = 只渲染预览。显式 extra_options.action 优先于本项
pdf_optionsNoPDF 排版选项（字段与客户端 pdfOptions 白名单一致，未知字段会报错）
paper_formatNo便捷参数：纸张名。标准纸名会同时写入 pdf_options.paperFormat 与 print_options.paperFormat；其它纸名只写后者
printer_nameNo便捷参数：打印机名，留空用系统默认打印机
extra_optionsNo额外选项：action/requestTimeout/cookies/httpHeaders/localStorages/sessionStorages，以及任意自定义键（会原样返回）
print_optionsNo打印机选项（字段与客户端 printOptions 白名单一致，未知字段会报错）

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.2.4

TDQS

A3.6/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description usefully discloses the highest-stakes behavior: by default it actually prints paper, and dry_run only renders. However it is silent on batch failure semantics (does one bad task abort the rest?), whether the operation is reversible, and what the call returns — significant gaps for a physical side-effect tool.

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

Conciseness5/5

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

Two tight sentences, front-loaded with what the tool does and followed by the default-vs-preview behavior. Nothing is wasted and nothing is buried.

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?

Given a 100%-covered schema and no output schema requirement, the description covers the essentials for an agent to call it correctly. It falls short only on precedence between the duplicate top-level and per-task option sets, which an agent must otherwise deduce from field descriptions.

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 the baseline is 3; the deeply documented pdfOptions/printOptions/extraOptions nested fields are fully covered by the schema. The description only restates dry_run and the type/data mapping, adding nothing about how the top-level convenience params (copies, paper_format, printer_name) interact with or are overridden by per-task settings.

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 ('一次提交多个打印任务') plus the supported content kinds (HTML / 网页 / PDF / 图片, URL or Base64 mixed), which implicitly separates it from the singular printHtml / printPdfByUrl / printImageByBase64 siblings. It never names a sibling outright, 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.

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

The '多个/batch' framing implies when to pick this over the single-task siblings, and the dry_run clause hints at a preview workflow, but there is no explicit 'use this when... / use printHtml when...' routing. Usage is inferable rather than stated.

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