reference-data

get_public_holidays

FREE. Official public-holiday calendar for a supported country, including gazetted movable holidays, with the official government source cited. Some countries also carry sub-national calendars (e.g. the German Laender): the subdivisions field lists them, and passing subdivision (ISO 3166-2, e.g. 'DE-BY') returns the national calendar merged with that region's statutory days.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`country`	Yes	ISO country code
`subdivision`	No	Optional ISO 3166-2 region code (e.g. 'DE-BY'). Returns national + that region's statutory holidays, each tagged national/regional. Omit for the national calendar.

TDQS

A4.3/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It discloses that the tool is free, cites official sources, and explains behavior with subdivisions (merged calendar). It does not mention rate limits or auth, but for a read-only holiday tool this is sufficient. Missing details on response format, but the explanation of sub-national calendars adds transparency.

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 core purpose in the first sentence. The second sentence provides essential sub-national detail. No fluff or redundancy.

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

Completeness3/5

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

With 2 parameters and no output schema, the description covers the main functionality (national and sub-national calendars). However, it does not clarify the limited set of supported countries (the enum shows only 8 Pacific nations), nor does it describe the expected response structure (e.g., list of holiday objects). This could leave the agent uncertain about handling unsupported countries or the output format.

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 description coverage is 100%, baseline 3. Description adds value by explaining that 'country' is an ISO code with examples, and that 'subdivision' returns merged national+regional holidays. It also mentions the existence of the 'subdivisions' field in the response, which goes beyond the schema.

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?

Description clearly states it provides official public holiday calendars, including movable holidays and sub-national calendars. It uses specific verbs like 'get' and 'returns', and distinguishes from siblings like count_working_days or settlement_date by focusing on holiday data.

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?

Explicitly marked as 'FREE', and explains when to use the subdivision parameter. It implies usage for obtaining holiday data but does not state when not to use it or provide direct comparison to sibling tools. However, given sibling tools are about wage, tax, working days, etc., the context is clear.

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

All reference-data 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

A4.2/5.0

Disambiguation5/5

Each tool targets a distinct domain: wage compliance, income tax, VAT, working days, holidays, series data (current, history, snapshot, catalog), and settlement dates. Even the financial computations (check_minimum_wage, compute_income_tax, compute_vat) have clearly different inputs and purposes, so no two tools are confusable.

Naming Consistency4/5

Most tools follow a clear verb_noun snake_case pattern (check_, compute_, count_, get_, list_). The only exception is `settlement_date`, which is a noun phrase rather than verb-first, but it remains consistent in style and readability. This minor deviation prevents a perfect score.

Tool Count5/5

With 10 tools, the server is well-scoped for a reference-data provider. It balances specific computations (minimum wage, tax, VAT) with general data access (series, holidays, settlements), and each tool serves a clear purpose without overlap or unnecessary bulk.

Completeness5/5

The tool surface comprehensively covers reference data for financial and calendar domains: statutory rates and compliance, holiday and working-day calendars, settlement conventions, and a generic series system with current, historical, snapshot, and catalog access. No obvious gaps impede an agent from accomplishing typical reference-data tasks, and the free list_series enables discovery.

Resources

Need Help?