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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It describes a straightforward read operation with no side effects or hidden behaviors. It does not disclose authorization needs or response format, but for a simple list retrieval, it is sufficiently transparent.

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 sentence followed by examples, extremely concise and front-loaded. Every element is necessary and contributes to understanding.

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?

Given the simplicity of the tool (no output schema, few parameters), the description is adequately complete. It explains the input options and what is returned. It could mention the return format, but it is not essential for correct invocation.

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?

Schema coverage is 100% with detailed parameter descriptions including mutual exclusivity. The description adds value beyond the schema by providing concrete input examples, reinforcing the parameter usage and format.

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 clearly states that the tool returns a list of Japanese holidays for a specified year or period. It uses a specific verb ('返します') and resource ('日本の祝日一覧'), and the examples distinguish it from sibling tools which handle business days and single-date checks.

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 provides clear usage context with input examples and implies when to use (to get holiday lists). It does not explicitly exclude scenarios or mention alternatives, but the sibling tools have distinct purposes, so the agent can infer appropriate usage.

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