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

Annotations already declare this as a non-read-only, non-destructive, open-world mutation. The description adds useful behavior about automatic holiday blocking and null disabling, but it does not explain the effect of resetDisabledHolidays or what happens to existing disabled holidays when the country changes.

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 with no filler. The key setting and the null behavior are both stated immediately.

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 two-parameter settings mutation with annotations covering safety, the description is minimally adequate. The major remaining gap is that it never explains resetDisabledHolidays, which is a meaningful option in the schema.

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?

With schema description coverage reported at 0%, the description must compensate for parameter meaning. It explains countryCode and the null/off behavior, but it completely omits resetDisabledHolidays, a boolean defaulting to true that likely affects existing holiday settings.

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 states a specific action and resource: choosing the country whose public holidays are automatically blocked, with null disabling the feature. It is clear enough to distinguish the core operation, but it does not explicitly contrast with sibling tools such as get_holiday_settings, list_holiday_countries, or toggle_holiday.

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 when to use the tool by explaining that it sets the holiday country and that null turns holidays off. However, it gives no explicit guidance on prerequisites or alternatives, such as listing countries first or using toggle_holiday for individual holidays.

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