A
licenseNot graded
qualityD
maintenanceConverts Markdown files to print-ready PDF and Word DOCX with professional styling, page numbers, table of contents, and custom themes.
MIT
Prince Cloud
by cloud.prince
Server Details
Convert Markdown, HTML, and web pages to high-quality PDF with Prince.
If you are the author of this connector, you can claim ownership with GitHub, an HTTP challenge, or a DNS record. Claimed connector authors can inspect health checks, view analytics, and manage their listing.
- Status
- Healthy
- Last Tested
- Transport
- Streamable HTTP
- URL
Available Tools
3 toolshtml_to_pdfARead-onlyInspect
Convert HTML content to PDF using Prince.
Args:
content: HTML content to convert
style: Additional CSS to apply (inline stylesheet content)
page_size: Page size (e.g., A4, letter)
page_margin: Page margins (e.g., 20mm)
javascript: Enable JavaScript execution
pdf_profile: PDF profile (e.g., PDF/A-3b, PDF/UA-1)
output_filename: Output filename for the PDF (default: "output.pdf")
ParametersJSON Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| style | No | ||
| content | Yes | ||
| page_size | No | ||
| javascript | No | ||
| page_margin | No | ||
| pdf_profile | No | ||
| output_filename | No |
TDQS
A3.9/5.0
Behavior3/5
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already cover safety hints (readOnly, destructive). The description adds engine detail (Prince) and default filename, but does not disclose return value or file output behavior. While output_filename suggests file creation, readOnlyHint=true is not directly contradicted, so no contradiction is flagged.
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?
The description is front-loaded with a one-line purpose followed by a structured Args list. Every line contributes value, with no redundancy or filler.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Completeness3/5
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Given 7 parameters, no output schema, and only base annotations, the description should explain return behavior and side effects. It does not mention where the PDF is written or what is returned. It also lacks notes on limitations or integration with sibling tools, leaving noticeable gaps.
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 descriptions are absent (0% coverage), so the description must compensate. It explains all parameters with concise purposes, examples for page_size and page_margin, and default for output_filename. However, values for pdf_profile and page_size are not fully enumerated.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Purpose5/5
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description clearly states 'Convert HTML content to PDF using Prince', specifying both input and output, and naming the engine. This distinguishes it from siblings like markdown_to_pdf and url_to_pdf.
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 description implies use when HTML content needs conversion to PDF, but does not explicitly mention alternatives or when-not-to-use scenarios. Context is clear but exclusions are absent.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
markdown_to_pdfARead-onlyInspect
Convert Markdown content to PDF using Prince.
Args:
content: Markdown content to convert
style: Additional CSS to apply (inline stylesheet content)
page_size: Page size (e.g., A4, letter)
page_margin: Page margins (e.g., 20mm)
javascript: Enable JavaScript execution
pdf_profile: PDF profile (e.g., PDF/A-3b, PDF/UA-1)
output_filename: Output filename for the PDF (default: "output.pdf")
ParametersJSON Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| style | No | ||
| content | Yes | ||
| page_size | No | ||
| javascript | No | ||
| page_margin | No | ||
| pdf_profile | No | ||
| output_filename | No |
TDQS
A4/5.0
Behavior3/5
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already provide readOnlyHint and destructiveHint. The description adds behavioral context by naming the Prince engine and the JavaScript execution flag. But it doesn't describe return format or side effects (e.g., whether file is saved to disk), so partial transparency.
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 description is front-loaded with a clear main sentence and follows with a structured, concise Args list. Each parameter description is useful, though the list is somewhat long.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Completeness3/5
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
The description covers parameters well but lacks explanation of the output format or file handling. No output schema exists, so this gap affects completeness. The tool is relatively simple but could state what the returned value is.
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?
With zero schema description coverage, the description's Args section compensates well by providing meaningful descriptions for each parameter, including examples and defaults. It adds value beyond the schema's titles.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Purpose5/5
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description states 'Convert Markdown content to PDF using Prince' with a specific verb and resource. It clearly differentiates from sibling tools html_to_pdf and url_to_pdf by specifying Markdown as input format.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Usage Guidelines4/5
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The description clearly implies usage for Markdown content, providing context. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions, like 'for HTML use html_to_pdf', so it falls short of a 5.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
url_to_pdfARead-onlyInspect
Fetch a URL and convert it to PDF using Prince.
Args:
url: URL of a document to fetch and convert
style: Additional CSS to apply (inline stylesheet content)
page_size: Page size (e.g., A4, letter)
page_margin: Page margins (e.g., 20mm)
javascript: Enable JavaScript execution
pdf_profile: PDF profile (e.g., PDF/A-3b, PDF/UA-1)
output_filename: Output filename for the PDF (default: "output.pdf")
ParametersJSON Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| url | Yes | ||
| style | No | ||
| page_size | No | ||
| javascript | No | ||
| page_margin | No | ||
| pdf_profile | No | ||
| output_filename | No |
TDQS
A4.4/5.0
Behavior4/5
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
The description adds valuable context beyond the annotations by explaining that the tool fetches a URL and uses Prince, plus it gives details about JavaScript execution and PDF profiles. Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint, but the description enriches these with meaningful conversion specifics without contradicting them.
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?
The description is concise and well-structured: a one-sentence summary followed by a clean, tabular args list. Every line adds value, with no redundant phrases or extraneous details.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Completeness3/5
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
The description covers all parameters but omits the return format (e.g., PDF binary or saved file path) and error behavior, especially since there is no output schema. It also lacks guidance on prerequisites like network access or Prince installation, leaving some gaps for a moderately complex tool.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Parameters5/5
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
With 0% schema description coverage, the description carries the full burden of explaining parameters. It provides clear, concise explanations for all seven parameters, including examples for page_size, page_margin, and pdf_profile, making the schema far more understandable.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Purpose5/5
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description clearly states the tool's function with a specific verb and resource: 'Fetch a URL and convert it to PDF using Prince.' This distinctly differentiates it from sibling tools html_to_pdf and markdown_to_pdf, which handle HTML and markdown inputs respectively.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Usage Guidelines4/5
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The description clearly implies the tool is for URLs, providing clear context on when to use it. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions, such as 'use html_to_pdf for HTML strings,' so it falls short of a 5.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Tool Schema Changelog
Recent tool additions, removals, and schema changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.
4 tool updates
- Added
html_to_pdf - Added
markdown_to_pdf - Removed
prince_convert - Added
url_to_pdf
1 tool update
- First observed
prince_convert
Frequently Asked Questions
Claiming proves that you control a remote MCP connector. It does not move, proxy, or interrupt the server.
Open the connector listing, choose Claim ownership, and sign in to Glama.
Complete one verification method:
GitHub identity — fastest for official registry listings. For a namespace such as
io.github.alice/server, link the matching GitHub user, then choose Claim with GitHub. An organization namespace such asio.github.acme/serveralso needs that organization to have installed the Glama AI GitHub App and approved its permissions, because GitHub discloses organization membership only to apps it has installed. Use HTTP or DNS when it has not.HTTP challenge — works when you can deploy a public file. Generate a token, publish the exact JSON Glama shows at
/.well-known/glama.jsonon the same origin as the connector, then choose Check HTTP challenge.DNS challenge — works when you control DNS but cannot change the server. Generate a token, create the exact TXT record Glama shows, wait for it to propagate, then choose Check DNS challenge.
After verification, Glama sends a confirmation email and gives you access to listing details, thumbnails, health checks, and analytics. Keep the HTTP file or DNS record in place: Glama periodically checks it and ownership remains verified while the token is discoverable.
The HTTP ownership file has this structure:
{
"$schema": "https://glama.ai/mcp/schemas/connector.json",
"claim": "glama_claim_..."
}Claim tokens are opaque, stable, and bound to the signed-in Glama account. They contain no email address or other personal information. If Glama can no longer discover a verified HTTP or DNS token, it starts a seven-day grace period before removing claim-based access. Restore the same token during that period to keep ownership verified. Never publish an email address, Glama session token, GitHub token, or connector credential as ownership proof.
If verification fails, confirm that you copied the current token exactly. The HTTP file must be public, return valid JSON with a successful HTTP response, and stay on the connector's origin. DNS changes may need more time to propagate. A claim cannot transfer to a different origin or hostname: if the connector target changes, Glama starts the grace period and the new target must be claimed separately after the previous claim is released.
For a connector linked to the official MCP Registry, registry updates continue to replace its name, description, and URL by default. After claiming, open Manage connector and enable Use Glama listing details as the source of truth if edits made on Glama should be preserved. Categories and thumbnails are always managed on Glama; registry linkage and technical connection settings continue to sync.
Control your server's listing on Glama, including description and metadata
Access analytics and receive server usage reports
Get monitoring and health status updates for your server
Feature your server to boost visibility and reach more users
To improve your MCP server's ranking:
Claim ownership of the server listing
Complete the server profile with an accurate description and thumbnail
Provide a test profile so Glama can connect to and evaluate the server
Keep tool definitions clear and complete to earn a high Tool Definition Quality Score (TDQS)
Route real usage through the Glama Gateway; more recorded successful server uses also improve the ranking
For users:
Full audit trail – every tool call is logged with inputs and outputs for compliance and debugging
Granular tool control – enable or disable individual tools per connector to limit what your AI agents can do
Centralized credential management – store and rotate API keys and OAuth tokens in one place
Change alerts – get notified when a connector changes its schema, adds or removes tools, or updates tool definitions, so nothing breaks silently
For server owners:
Proven adoption – public usage metrics on your listing show real-world traction and build trust with prospective users
Tool-level analytics – see which tools are being used most, helping you prioritize development and documentation
Direct user feedback – users can report issues and suggest improvements through the listing, giving you a channel you would not have otherwise
The connector status is unhealthy when Glama is unable to successfully connect to the server. This can happen for several reasons:
The server is experiencing an outage
The URL of the server is wrong
Credentials required to access the server are missing or invalid
If you are the owner of this MCP connector and would like to make modifications to the listing, including providing test credentials for accessing the server, please contact support@glama.ai.
Discussions
No comments yet. Be the first to start the discussion!
Related MCP Connectors
Turn HTML or Markdown into a clean, styled PDF and get a download link.
- blinkpdfOAuthio.blinkpdf
Render Markdown and LLM output into accessible PDF/UA-1 PDFs. No headless Chromium.
Convert any public webpage to a PDF. Single narrow tool, not a bloated PDF toolkit.
Generate PDF, Word (.docx) and PowerPoint (.pptx) documents from Markdown over MCP.
Related MCP Servers
- AlicenseAqualityDmaintenanceConverts Markdown documents to PDF files with support for syntax highlighting, custom styling, Mermaid diagrams, optional page numbers, and configurable watermarks.176MIT
- FlicenseNot gradedqualityDmaintenanceConverts Markdown files and raw content into professionally styled PDFs with full support for Mermaid diagrams and syntax highlighting. It offers customizable page formats, margins, and modern typography for high-quality document generation.11-
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityDmaintenanceConverts markdown files into professional PDF documents with automatic table of contents and interactive navigation.8MIT
Try in Browser
Glama MCP Gateway
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
TDQS
A4.2/5.0
Disambiguation5/5
Each tool targets a distinctly different input source: HTML content, Markdown content, and a URL. There is no overlap in purpose, making selection unambiguous.
Naming Consistency5/5
All tool names follow the exact same verb_noun pattern: html_to_pdf, markdown_to_pdf, url_to_pdf. This is perfectly consistent and predictable.
Tool Count5/5
With only 3 tools, the server is tightly scoped to its core function of PDF conversion from three common input types. Each tool earns its place.
Completeness4/5
The set covers the most common conversion inputs (HTML, Markdown, URL). A minor gap is lack of direct file input, but these three cover the majority of use cases.