render_pdfRender markdown (or simple HTML) into a clean, printable A4 PDF. Supports headings, paragraphs, bullet and numbered lists, blockquotes, code blocks, horizontal rules, and inline bold/italic/code. Returns the PDF as base64 plus page count.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| title | No | PDF document title metadata | |
| format | No | Input format, default markdown | |
| content | Yes | The markdown or HTML source to render |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the output format (base64 PDF plus page count), the A4 page size, and the supported subset of markdown/HTML features. It does not detail limitations like CSS support or error behavior, but the provided information gives a solid behavioral profile for a non-destructive render tool.
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 three sentences, each purposeful: main purpose, supported features, and return format. It is front-loaded with the core action and avoids redundancy or unnecessary text.
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?
The tool is simple with no output schema, but the description covers the return format (base64 + page count) and supported input features. It does not explain all edge cases or styling limitations, but for a straightforward render tool, the description is sufficiently complete for an agent to select and invoke it correctly.
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?
Schema coverage is 100% with descriptions for all three parameters, so baseline is 3. The description adds some value by elaborating on supported content elements (headings, lists, code blocks), which enriches the 'content' parameter meaning, but it does not add detail on 'title' or 'format' beyond schema.
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?
The description clearly states the tool renders markdown or simple HTML into an A4 PDF, using a specific verb ('render') and resource ('markdown/HTML to PDF'). It also lists supported formatting elements, distinguishing it from sibling tools that extract tables, OCR images, parse invoices, or convert PDFs to markdown.
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 usage for converting markdown/HTML to PDF but does not explicitly mention when to use this tool over siblings or provide exclusions. The context suggests it is for PDF generation, while siblings handle PDF extraction or parsing, but this is not stated in the description.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Each tool targets a distinct document processing task: table extraction, image OCR, invoice parsing, PDF-to-markdown conversion, and markdown-to-PDF rendering. Even though parse_invoice can process images, its structured output clearly differentiates it from ocr_image.
Four tools follow a clear verb_noun pattern (extract_tables, ocr_image, parse_invoice, render_pdf). However, pdf_to_markdown breaks the pattern by using a source_to_target format instead of a verb-first name, creating a minor inconsistency.
Five tools is a well-scoped count for a document processing server. Each tool serves a distinct purpose without redundancy, covering input (PDF, image), processing (extraction, OCR, parsing), and output (markdown, PDF).
The toolkit covers a coherent document workflow: extract text/tables from PDFs, OCR images, parse invoices, convert to markdown, and generate PDFs. A minor gap is the lack of direct scanned-PDF handling (requires manual page-to-image conversion), but this is workable around.