[Dev] Is a date a public holiday in a country (2-letter ISO code)? Returns the holiday name, its types, and the next upcoming holiday. Costs $0.001. Useful for scheduling.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| date | No | YYYY-MM-DD (defaults to today) | |
| country | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It discloses the cost ($0.001) and marks the tool as '[Dev]' indicating development status. It does not mention if it is read-only or any side effects, but for a query tool, the cost and dev note are valuable behavioral disclosures.
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?
Two concise sentences with zero wasted words. The information is front-loaded: purpose, output, cost, usage hint. Well-structured for quick understanding.
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?
Given no output schema, the description adequately states return values (holiday name, types, next upcoming). It covers core functionality for a simple query tool. Slightly lacking in error handling or edge cases, but sufficient.
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 50% (only date described as YYYY-MM-DD, defaulting to today). The description adds meaning: country must be 2-letter ISO code. This compensates for the missing schema description of country.
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 checks if a date is a public holiday in a country, returning the holiday name, types, and next upcoming holiday. It specifies the country format (2-letter ISO code) and mentions cost. No ambiguity or tautology.
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 says 'Useful for scheduling' but does not provide explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance. Since there are no sibling holiday tools, no alternatives are needed, but the guidance is minimal.
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.