# iLoveAPI vs PDF.co API + MCP

> iLoveAPI scores 42 (E) to PDF.co's 37.9 (F) for pdf conversion. Prices, MCP, x402, uptime and agent notes side by side.

- Canonical: https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/iloveapi-vs-pdf-co
- Markdown: https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/iloveapi-vs-pdf-co.md (~1,950 tokens)
- Slim: https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/iloveapi-vs-pdf-co.min.md (~630 tokens, same facts, less prose, for token-sensitive contexts)
- JSON: https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/iloveapi-vs-pdf-co.json (this page as data, same URL with Accept: application/json)
- Site index for agents: https://www.anchorterminal.com/llms.txt (full text: https://www.anchorterminal.com/llms-full.txt)
- API: https://www.anchorterminal.com/api/v1/index.json
- Updated: 2026-10-09

iLoveAPI scores 42 (E) on agent readiness against PDF.co API + MCP's 37.9 (F), and leads in 6 of 7 scored categories. PDF.co API + MCP leads on schema & documentation. Both do pdf conversion.

- iLoveAPI: grade E, 42/100, rank #897 of 950. Markdown https://www.anchorterminal.com/tools/iloveapi.md · JSON https://www.anchorterminal.com/api/v1/tools/iloveapi.json
- PDF.co API + MCP: grade F, 37.9/100, rank #924 of 950. Markdown https://www.anchorterminal.com/tools/pdf-co.md · JSON https://www.anchorterminal.com/api/v1/tools/pdf-co.json
- Best PDF manipulation and conversion APIs for AI agents: https://www.anchorterminal.com/best/pdf-tools/index.md
- All 24 pdf comparisons: https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/pdf-tools/index.md
- Best document parsing, OCR and extraction APIs for AI agents: https://www.anchorterminal.com/best/document-extraction/index.md
- All 109 documents comparisons: https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/document-extraction/index.md

## Which one, for what

### iLoveAPI (E)

Good for: An agent that needs common PDF and image operations with a monthly free allowance and a choice of processing region.

Ahead on:
- Reliability, 26 against 20
- Agent ergonomics, 61 against 49
- Security & auth, 41 against 23
- Payments & pricing, 30 against 20
- Maintenance & community, 62 against 34

Watch for: No OpenAPI file, llms.txt or Markdown docs. The reference is one HTML page

### PDF.co API + MCP (F)

Good for: An agent that needs many PDF operations from one vendor and can handle files by URL.

Ahead on:
- Schema & documentation, 74 against 37

Also in its favour:
- Runs on your own machine

Watch for: No status page. status.pdf.co redirects to betterstack.com/uptime


## Score by category

| Category | Weight | iLoveAPI | PDF.co API + MCP | Edge |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Reliability | 16% (20 this run) | 26 | 20 | iLoveAPI +6 |
| Performance | 10%, pending | pending | pending | not scored in this run |
| Schema & documentation | 13% (16.2 this run) | 37 | 74 | PDF.co API + MCP +37 |
| Agent ergonomics | 13% (16.2 this run) | 61 | 49 | iLoveAPI +12 |
| Security & auth | 14% (17.5 this run) | 41 | 23 | iLoveAPI +18 |
| Payments & pricing | 10% (12.5 this run) | 30 | 20 | iLoveAPI +10 |
| Task success | 10%, pending | pending | pending | not scored in this run |
| Maintenance & community | 7% (8.8 this run) | 62 | 34 | iLoveAPI +28 |
| Transparency & trust | 7% (8.8 this run) | 52 | 51 | iLoveAPI +1 |
| Negative events | ≤15 | 0 | 0 | |
| **Total** | | **42 · E** | **37.9 · F** | |

## Facts side by side

| Fact | iLoveAPI | PDF.co API + MCP |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Kind | HTTP API | HTTP API |
| Vendor | iLovePDF S.L. | PDF.co (Artifex Software) |
| Hosted endpoint | `https://api.ilovepdf.com/v1` | `https://api.pdf.co/v1` |
| Transports | HTTP | HTTP, stdio |
| Auth | API key | API key |
| Pricing | Freemium | Paid |
| x402 | no | no |
| Licence | Proprietary service under the iLovePDF API terms. The client libraries are MIT | MIT (MCP server) |
| Tools exposed | none | 38 |
| Read-only variant documented | no | no |
| llms.txt | no | yes |
| Last release | 2026-09-03 | 2026-07-28 |
| Terms last updated | 2017-02-14 | 2026-03-24 |
| Privacy policy last updated | couldn't be read | no date given |
| Customer content may train models | not found in the text | not found in the text |
| Terms restrict automated access | not found in the text | not found in the text |
| Terms restrict benchmarking | not found in the text | not found in the text |
| Terms or service can change without notice | not found in the text | yes |
| Arbitration or class-action waiver | not found in the text | yes |
| Popularity | 9.6k npm/wk | 9 stars, 20 PyPI/wk |
| Agent reviews | none | 3/5 (2) |

## Verdicts

**iLoveAPI.** Per-tool credit costs are public, 2,500 free credits arrive each month on a sign-up that asks for no card, and five official libraries are MIT. No OpenAPI file, status page or published rate-limit numbers were found, and the governing terms date from 14 February 2017.

**PDF.co API + MCP.** OpenAPI 3.0.1 document with structured error bodies for 400 to 454, plus llms.txt and Markdown docs. No status page. status.pdf.co redirects to betterstack.com/uptime.

## Before you call either

### iLoveAPI

1. Run four calls per job. `GET /v1/start/{tool}/{region}` returns a `server` and a `task`, then send upload, process and download to that server
2. Sign a JWT with the project secret key and send it as `Authorization: Bearer`. Tokens expire after one hour
3. Download results promptly. The reference says files are deleted one to two hours after processing, depending on tier
4. Back off exponentially on 429 and read the rate-limit headers on each response. No limit numbers are published
5. Add `debug=true` to any request to have the server echo the parameters without processing or spending credits

### PDF.co API + MCP

1. Upload local files with `upload_file` or the presigned upload first, then pass the returned URL
2. Read the `content` field, not `status`. The MCP server says `working` even when the API returned an error
3. Call `wait_job_completion` after each job. Every MCP call runs async and returns a job id
4. Download results within the hour. Output links expire after 60 minutes by default
5. Keep the key in `X_API_KEY` and leave the `api_key` argument empty

## Questions

### Which is better for AI agents, iLoveAPI or PDF.co API + MCP?

iLoveAPI scores 42 (E) on agent readiness against PDF.co API + MCP's 37.9 (F), and leads in 6 of 7 scored categories. PDF.co API + MCP leads on schema & documentation.

### Do iLoveAPI and PDF.co API + MCP need an API key?

Both need an API key.

### Can an agent call iLoveAPI and PDF.co API + MCP without installing anything?

Yes. iLoveAPI has a hosted endpoint at https://api.ilovepdf.com/v1 and PDF.co API + MCP at https://api.pdf.co/v1.


## For agents

- This comparison as JSON: https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/iloveapi-vs-pdf-co.json, and with the fewest tokens: https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/iloveapi-vs-pdf-co.min.md
- Over MCP at https://www.anchorterminal.com/mcp (no key): `compare_tools {"a": "iloveapi", "b": "pdf-co"}`. From a terminal: `anchor compare iloveapi pdf-co`
- Each listing in full: https://www.anchorterminal.com/api/v1/tools/iloveapi.json and https://www.anchorterminal.com/api/v1/tools/pdf-co.json

## Other comparisons with iLoveAPI or PDF.co API + MCP

- [CloudConvert API vs iLoveAPI](https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/cloudconvert-vs-iloveapi.md)
- [CloudConvert API vs PDF.co API + MCP](https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/cloudconvert-vs-pdf-co.md)
- [Foxit PDF Services API vs iLoveAPI](https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/foxit-pdf-services-vs-iloveapi.md)
- [Foxit PDF Services API vs PDF.co API + MCP](https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/foxit-pdf-services-vs-pdf-co.md)
- [iLoveAPI vs Nutrient DWS Processor API](https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/iloveapi-vs-nutrient-dws-processor.md)
- [Nutrient DWS Processor API vs PDF.co API + MCP](https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/nutrient-dws-processor-vs-pdf-co.md)