Skip to main content
Glama

reference-data

by dev.afriref

count_working_days

PAID ($0.02). Working days in a date range for a country: weekends (Egypt's Fri–Sat handled) and statutory public holidays applied, with the holidays hit by name and the next working day after the range. Range max 366 days. Pass api_key if you have one; otherwise the response explains how to pay via x402.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
toYesRange end, YYYY-MM-DD, inclusive
fromYesRange start, YYYY-MM-DD, inclusive
api_keyNoAPI key
countryYesISO country code
subdivisionNoOptional ISO 3166-2 region code (e.g. 'DE-BY') to apply that region's statutory holidays on top of the national calendar. Regions are listed under `subdivisions` by get_public_holidays. Unknown code is refused free with the list.

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description bears full burden and effectively discloses behavior: weekends (Egypt's Fri–Sat handled), statutory holidays applied, holidays listed by name, and the next working day after the range. It also mentions the payment model. Some details like error handling or rate limits are absent.

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?

The description is two sentences with no wasted words, front-loading the most critical information (paid tool, core function, country handling, holidays). Every sentence serves a purpose.

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

Completeness4/5

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

Given the tool has no output schema, the description compensates by describing what is returned (weekends applied, holidays hit by name, next working day). Parameters are well-covered. The complexity is moderate, and the description is mostly complete, though it could mention typical use cases or limitations.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100%, but the description adds value beyond schema by explaining the api_key parameter's role in payment, and hints that subdivision codes can be discovered via get_public_holidays. This aids agent decision-making without repeating schema details.

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?

The description clearly states the tool counts working days within a date range for a country, applying weekends and statutory public holidays. It distinguishes from siblings like 'get_public_holidays' and 'settlement_date' by focusing on counting working days and providing specific holiday details.

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 description specifies the use case (counting working days with weekends and holidays), the maximum range of 366 days, and mentions the api_key/payment process. However, it lacks explicit guidance on when not to use or direct alternatives, though the sibling list provides some context.

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

All reference-data toolsInspect
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

A4.3/5.0
Disambiguation5/5

Each of the 11 tools addresses a clearly distinct operation: compliance checking, income tax, payroll, VAT, working days, holidays, series queries (current/history/snapshot/catalog), and settlement date. Even within the tax and calendar families, the descriptions precisely delineate boundaries, so there is no realistic risk of an agent selecting the wrong tool.

Naming Consistency4/5

The vast majority of tools follow a consistent verb_noun snake_case pattern (check_, compute_, get_, list_, count_). The only deviation is settlement_date, which is a noun phrase rather than verb_noun, but it is still clear and idiomatic. This single outlier prevents a perfect score.

Tool Count5/5

With 11 tools, the server is well-scoped for a reference-data domain covering statutory rates, calculations, calendars, and settlement conventions. Each tool has a distinct purpose and earns its place; the count is neither thin nor bloated.

Completeness4/5

The server provides strong coverage of its stated domain: statutory tax computations, payroll, minimum wage, VAT, holidays, working days, and settlement dates, plus a generic series API for extensibility. Minor gaps exist, such as payroll only supporting Nigeria and Kenya and no standalone social-security contributor, but the response descriptions explicitly disclose these limits, and the generic series endpoint provides a workaround for common lookups.

Resources