cn_holidayIs a date a Chinese public holiday, weekend, or 调休 make-up workday? Plus the next holiday.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| date | No | YYYY-MM-DD, default today |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
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?
Annotations already indicate a safe read-only, idempotent operation. The description adds specific behavioral detail: it evaluates three categories (public holiday, weekend, workday) and returns the next holiday. This provides useful context beyond the annotations, though it doesn't cover edge cases like historical date range.
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 a single front-loaded sentence that conveys the complete functionality without any wasted words. It is concise and immediately understandable.
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?
For a simple single-parameter tool with a rich output schema and informative annotations, the description fully conveys what the tool does. There are no notable gaps in context for an agent to select and invoke this tool 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 description coverage is 100%, with the only parameter `date` fully documented as YYYY-MM-DD with a default of today. The description adds no extra parameter semantics, so the baseline score of 3 applies because the schema already carries the burden.
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's function: determining whether a date is a Chinese public holiday, weekend, or 调休 make-up workday, plus providing the next holiday. This specific scope distinguishes it from sibling tools like lunar_calendar (lunar dates) and huangli (almanac).
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 holiday queries, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives or mention any exclusions. Given related sibling tools exist, explicit guidance on when to choose this tool would be beneficial, but the purpose is clear enough to infer usage.
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.
Most tools are clearly distinct: bazi_chart, lunar_calendar, huangli, pick_lucky_days all relate to Chinese calendrical/astrological concepts but have different purposes (birth chart, lunar info, almanac, lucky day selection). However, bazi_chart and lunar_calendar both touch on 干支/zodiac; pick_lucky_days could overlap with huangli. Minor ambiguity, but descriptions clarify.
Tool names are all snake_case and mostly descriptive, but they don't follow a strong verb_noun pattern (e.g., pick_lucky_days is verb+noun, but bazi_chart and phone_info are noun-like). Slight inconsistency in style, but the pattern is predictable enough.
10 tools is well-scoped for a China-focused utility server. Each tool serves a distinct purpose (ID validation, phone info, holidays, calendar, pinyin, network reachability), and the count feels reasonable without being bloated or thin.
The server covers a broad range of China-specific utilities, but there are gaps: no tool for Chinese address parsing, no tool for bank card validation, no tool for translation. While the existing set covers common needs, the 'china' theme could benefit from more coverage. Also, what_can_you_do suggests recipes but the actual tool set lacks some common use cases.