tilwhen date engine

Public holidays for a jurisdiction and year

holidays

Read-onlyIdempotent

Observed public holidays with the nominal (legal) date and status: rule (statutory) or declared (officially declared for that year). Declared-only holidays are omitted for undeclared years, with a holiday_data_incomplete warning.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`year`	Yes
`jurisdiction`	Yes	US, GB, GB-SCT, GB-NIR, CA, AU, UG (alias UK)

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`answer`	Yes	The calculated answer (kind-discriminated)
`receipt`	Yes	Auditable receipt: inputs, timezone, convention, workweek, holiday calendar, exclusions, versions, stable result ID

TDQS

A4.5/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Description informs that declared-only holidays are omitted when the year is undeclared, with a warning. This goes beyond the annotations (readOnlyHint, idempotentHint) to disclose data completeness behavior. No contradictions.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the tool's purpose, efficiently adding a critical behavioral note about incomplete data. No unnecessary words.

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

Completeness5/5

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

Given the simple nature (2 required params, output schema exists, annotations rich), the description covers the key behavioral aspect (incomplete data warning) and overall purpose. No additional information is needed for correct invocation.

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 has 2 parameters with 50% description coverage (jurisdiction has aliases, year has none). The tool description does not add further semantics to either parameter beyond what is in the schema. The description's mention of 'jurisdiction and year' is minimal.

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?

Title and description clearly state that the tool retrieves observed public holidays for a given jurisdiction and year, specifying what information is returned (nominal date and status). This distinguishes it from sibling tools which are date arithmetic functions.

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 context indicates this is a holiday lookup tool, distinct from date calculation siblings. No explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance is provided, but the purpose is clear enough for an agent to select correctly.

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

All tilwhen date engine 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

A4.1/5.0

Disambiguation5/5

Each tool targets a distinct date operation: calendar addition/subtraction, business days, days between, holidays, invoice due, next occurrence, natural language parsing, and an explainer. No two tools overlap in purpose; descriptions clearly differentiate them.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tool names follow a consistent pattern: lowercase with underscores, predominantly verb_noun (add_days, parse_date_query) or noun_phrase (business_days, invoice_due). The naming is uniform and predictable.

Tool Count5/5

With 9 tools, the server is well-scoped. Each tool addresses a core date calculation need without redundancy or bloat. The count is appropriate for a focused date engine.

Completeness5/5

The tool surface covers all essential date operations: calendar arithmetic, business days, holidays, payment terms, next occurrences, and natural language queries. No obvious gaps remain for common date calculations.

Resources

Need Help?