Skip to main content
Glama

get_public_holidays_worldwide

Read-onlyIdempotent

FREE with any API key, including the free key by email (https://ausref.dev/free-key). Same as get_public_holidays, but for every country across all seven brands, not only Australasian. Unmetered: never counts against the key's allowance. Pass api_key, or send the key as the X-API-Key header on /mcp.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
api_keyNoAny valid API key. Optional when the key is sent as the X-API-Key header on /mcp.
countryYesISO country code, any covered country
subdivisionNoOptional 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.

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
unitNo
errorNoPresent on a free refusal or error; no charge
notesNo
staleNo
valueNo
seriesNo
sourceNo
countryNo
no_chargeNo
price_usdNo
confidenceNo
disclaimerNo
how_to_payNo
bind_seriesNo
explanationNo
label_basisNoInputs and the rule ids that produced the two labels
subdivisionNo
x_next_bindNo
http_endpointNo
coverage_labelNoHow much of the question is covered: ready = complete; partial = held with a disclosed limitation or default; gap = no number served. Rules at /label-rules
effective_fromNo
last_confirmedNo
confidence_labelNoEvidence verdict derived from source type, verification age and the stale flag (answers: the weakest series read). Rules at /label-rules
payment_requiredNotrue when the call needs payment; how_to_pay explains x402 or card
available_subdivisionsNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed4 schema fields changed
    • removedOutput schema / properties / label_basis / properties / source_type / anyOf
      Removed value: -[
      -  {
      -    "type": "string"
      -  },
      -  {
      -    "type": "null"
      -  }
      -]
    • addedOutput schema / properties / label_basis / properties / source_type / type
      Added value: +[
      +  "string",
      +  "null"
      +]
    • removedOutput schema / properties / label_basis / properties / verification_age_days / anyOf
      Removed value: -[
      -  {
      -    "type": "number"
      -  },
      -  {
      -    "type": "null"
      -  }
      -]
    • addedOutput schema / properties / label_basis / properties / verification_age_days / type
      Added value: +[
      +  "number",
      +  "null"
      +]
  2. Added

TDQS

A3.9/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly/idempotent/openWorld/non-destructive, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds meaningful behavior they do not: the call is free with any API key, never counts against the key's allowance, and the key can be supplied either via the api_key parameter or the X-API-Key header. That quota and auth context is exactly the kind of added value expected here.

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

Conciseness4/5

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

Three tight sentences with no wasted clauses. The opening free-key/promo framing is slightly marketing-flavored and could be trimmed, but the scope distinction and auth note are front-loaded and easy to scan.

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?

With an output schema present, return values need not be explained, and annotations cover the safety profile. The description supplies the scope, cost, and auth facts an agent needs; only a brief note on what subdivision omission implies is left entirely to the schema, which is acceptable.

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 description coverage is 100%, so country, subdivision, and api_key are already documented in the schema, including the enum values and the national-vs-regional tagging semantics of subdivision. The description repeats the api_key dual-auth option but adds no syntax or meaning beyond the schema, making the baseline 3 appropriate.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description anchors the tool to its sibling ('Same as get_public_holidays, but for every country'), which combined with the name makes the resource (public holidays) and scope (worldwide vs Australasian) unambiguous. It never states the retrieval verb directly, relying on the sibling reference, so it falls just short of a self-contained 5.

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?

It clearly routes the agent between this tool and get_public_holidays by scope: use this one when the country is outside Australasia. It also flags the cost condition (free/unmetered), which is genuine selection guidance, but there are no explicit when-not-to-use statements or alternatives beyond the one sibling named.

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

Try in Browser

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources