List public holidays for a country and year. Returns every public holiday of the given year for the given country, with local and English names, date and scope. Returns: Array of public holidays for the requested year and country..
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| year | Yes | Calendar year, e.g. 2026. | |
| countryCode | Yes | ISO 3166-1 alpha-2 country code, e.g. US, DE, CN. |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so safety is covered. The description adds useful context that results include local and English names, date, and scope, and that the return is an array. No contradictions with annotations.
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 short and front-loaded with the main purpose. However, it contains a slight redundancy: 'Returns every public holiday...' is repeated in 'Returns: Array of public holidays...' with a double period, which is a minor structural flaw.
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 list tool with rich annotations and a complete schema, the description adequately explains the return content (local/English names, date, scope). It could explicitly mention the sibling tool for better contextual completeness, but the core information is present.
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 both parameters (year and countryCode) well described in the schema. The description does not add parameter-level details, but the baseline of 3 is appropriate since the schema carries the full 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 lists public holidays for a given country and year, with the explicit scope of returning every holiday for that period. This distinguishes it from the sibling tool get_next_public_holidays, which likely returns only upcoming holidays.
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 clearly implies when to use the tool: when you need all public holidays for a specific country and year. It does not explicitly exclude alternatives or mention the sibling tool, so it lacks the when-not-to-use guidance that would merit a 5.
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.
The two tools are clearly distinct: one returns upcoming holidays from today, the other returns all holidays for a specific year. There is no overlap or ambiguity in their purposes.
Both tools follow a consistent 'get_' + descriptive noun pattern, and the names clearly reflect their functionality: 'get_next_public_holidays' and 'get_public_holidays'. The convention is uniform.
With only 2 tools, the server feels thin for a public holidays domain. While the core operations are present, the low count is borderline and may leave users wanting additional functionality such as listing supported countries.
The two tools cover 'next holidays' and 'holidays for a year', but there is no way to list supported countries or query holidays by specific date ranges. This is a notable gap that could cause agent failures when trying to validate country codes or find a holiday on a particular date.