Timix.AI

suggest_holiday_profile

Look up the official public/national holidays for a country (ISO-2 code, e.g. US, IL, GB) and year from an authoritative public source (Hebcal for Israel, Nager.Date for everywhere else). Returns a DRAFT list of holiday dates: each is either a full day off or a half/partial working day (with a start/end working window). Use this to PROPOSE a holiday profile — never invent holiday dates from memory. The dates returned are authoritative for that exact year.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`year`	Yes	The calendar year to look up holidays for (e.g. 2026).
`country`	Yes	ISO-2 country code (two letters), e.g. "US", "IL", "GB", "DE".

TDQS

A4.1/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description explains the authoritative sources, draft output with day types, and warns against invention. It lacks details on authentication or side effects but covers key behavior.

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 concise with multiple sentences that are clear and front-loaded. It avoids unnecessary repetition.

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

Completeness4/5

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

For a simple 2-parameter tool with no output schema, the description covers the purpose, source behavior, return format, and usage instruction. It is adequately complete.

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 coverage is 100%, so the schema already defines both parameters. The description adds ISO-2 examples and source info but doesn't significantly enhance understanding beyond the schema.

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 does a lookup of public holidays using authoritative sources, returning a draft list. It is distinct from sibling tools like create_holiday_profile.

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 explicitly says to use this to propose a holiday profile and not to invent dates, providing clear guidance. It doesn't list alternatives but distinguishes from create/update siblings.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

All Timix.AI tools Inspect

Try in Browser

RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

B3/5.0

Disambiguation2/5

Multiple tools have overlapping purposes, e.g., create_time_report and log_time both create a single time entry with near-identical descriptions. There are also many similar getter/list tools that blur together, making it hard for an agent to select the right one.

Naming Consistency2/5

Most tool names use snake_case, but verbs are inconsistent: 'list' vs 'get' for similar operations, 'manage' combines create/update/delete, and 'use_favorite' is an outlier. This pattern reduces predictability.

Tool Count1/5

With 114 tools, the set is extremely large and far beyond a well-scoped server (typical 3-15). This overwhelms agents and suggests many tools could be consolidated or removed.

Completeness3/5

The tool surface covers a broad domain including customers, projects, tasks, time tracking, invoicing, and user management, but there are gaps like no list_users or direct user listing, and some operations seem redundant rather than filling missing functionality.

Resources

Need Help?