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

mcp-web-print-pdf

by weixiaoyi
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Local

printHtmlByBase64

Convert Base64-encoded HTML into PDF for printing; enable dry_run to preview the output without sending it to a printer.

Instructions

把 Base64 编码的 HTML 渲染成 PDF 打印。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": {
      "base64": "<base64>"
    },
    "name": "printHtmlByBase64"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
base64YesHTML 的 base64，可带 data:text/html;base64, 前缀
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

B3.2/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations at all, the description carries the full burden; it does disclose the critical trait that the default action consumes physical paper and that dry_run previews instead. Beyond that it says nothing about return values, permission/error conditions, or the fact that unknown pdf_options/print_options keys are rejected.

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 short sentences, zero filler, with the effect of calling the tool (prints paper) placed first and the preview escape hatch second. Nothing is padded or repeated.

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

Completeness2/5

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

For an 8-parameter, deeply nested, physically side-effecting tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is far too thin. It never mentions the high-value convenience parameters (printer_name, paper_format, copies), what a preview returns, or the whitelist-rejection behavior that will bite an agent.

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% and the nested pdf_options/print_options/extra_options are thoroughly documented inline, so the schema does the heavy lifting. The description only restates dry_run, adding no meaning beyond the schema text for the other seven parameters.

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 chain: render Base64-encoded HTML into a PDF and print it. The 'Base64' qualifier implicitly distinguishes it from printHtmlByUrl/printHtml, though no sibling is named explicitly.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

The only guidance is the dry_run default, which is already documented in the schema. It never says when to pick this tool over printHtml, printHtmlByUrl, or printPdfByBase64, nor any prerequisites (e.g., printer availability, requiring printer_name).

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