Check PDF syntax
Check a PDF's structural health and get a clear verdict: valid, valid with warnings, or invalid.
Working…
Questions people ask
- What can be wrong in a PDF's structure?
- Common findings are a missing %PDF header or %%EOF terminator, a cross-reference table that needed rebuilding while opening, a trailer dictionary that cannot be found, object streams that fail to parse, and two readers disagreeing about the page count. Each finding is attributed to the checker that reported it, so you can judge its weight.
- What does "valid with warnings" actually mean?
- The document opened and its pages are readable, but at least one structural repair or complaint happened along the way: the file works, and the warnings tell you which corners are worn. Many tools would never mention them; we prefer you know.
- Does the verdict promise the PDF will print or display right?
- No, and any tool promising that from structure alone is overreaching. The verdict is about the file format's health: parsing, page access and internal consistency. Conformance profiles (PDF/A), accessibility and visual checks are different examinations, and this tool never claims them.
- What do I get as output?
- Two artifacts: a readable report.txt with the verdict, counts and every finding listed, and findings.json with the same data in machine-readable form for pipelines and checklists.
- What about encrypted PDFs?
- Refused with a clear message. A structural verdict of encrypted bytes would be a guess, so the tool declines rather than pretending to inspect what it cannot read.
- What happens to my files?
- The upload is removed as soon as processing finishes; the reports stay downloadable for about 10 minutes, then they are deleted automatically.