Skip to main content
Glama

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

A4.5/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Discloses paid cost, weekend handling (including Egypt's Fri-Sat), holiday return by name, next working day after range, and range limit. No annotations exist so description bears full burden and does so well.

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?

Three sentences with no fluff. Purpose, details, payment all front-loaded.

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?

No output schema but description explains return values (holiday names, next working day). Covers inputs, behavior, constraints, and payment. Complete for this tool.

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%, baseline 3. Description adds meaning by explaining purpose of api_key and mentioning optional subdivision. Adds value beyond 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?

Clearly states it counts working days in a date range considering weekends and public holidays, with a specific verb and resource. Distinguishes from sibling tools like get_public_holidays.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Mentions paid nature, max range, and api_key handling but does not explicitly state when to use vs alternatives or when not to use.

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.

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Disambiguation5/5

Each tool targets a distinct operation: minimum wage, income tax, VAT, working days, holidays, series data, and settlement dates. No overlap in purpose.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tool names follow a consistent verb_noun pattern (e.g., check_minimum_wage, compute_income_tax, get_public_holidays, list_series). Only 'settlement_date' is a noun phrase but still clear.

Tool Count5/5

10 tools cover a well-scoped domain of economic reference data without bloat. The count feels appropriate for the server's purpose.

Completeness4/5

Covers core areas: wage, tax, VAT, holidays, series, settlement dates. Minor gaps exist (e.g., no social security or currency data), but the scope is clearly defined and noted.

Resources