DatoQA — Official Public Holidays

by dev.workers.bhazarstudio.datoqa

Overview Discussions Admin

Server Details

Government and OpenHolidays calendars: regional scope, multilingual names, dated sources and gaps.

Datoka portal and connection guide: https://datoka.dev/qa.

Ownership verified

Status: Healthy
Uptime: 100.0% over 22 days
Last Tested: 2026-10-18 20:57
Transport: Streamable HTTP · MCP 2025-11-25
URL

TDQS

A4/5.0

Scored 2026-10-07 07:20 across 5 tools

Disambiguation4/5

get_public_holidays and list_holiday_regions are clearly separated by retrieval vs discovery. get_record and get_evidence have subtle overlap (record details vs integrity proof for a record), but descriptions distinguish them. catalog is meta and distinct from the data tools.

Naming Consistency4/5

Four tools follow a verb_noun pattern (get_evidence, get_public_holidays, get_record, list_holiday_regions), while catalog is a bare noun, a minor deviation. Overall consistent and predictable.

Tool Count5/5

Five tools are well-suited for a read-only public holidays API with provenance: discovery, retrieval, record lookup, evidence, and scope inspection. No tool feels redundant or missing from the core count.

Completeness4/5

The surface covers region discovery, holiday retrieval by date/year, record provenance, and integrity evidence. Minor gaps like bulk export or holiday name search exist, but core workflows are covered.

Available Tools

5 tools

catalogA

Read-onlyIdempotent

Inspect

Inspect this connection’s scope, tools and access policy. With no arguments returns the usual catalog. On the general or economy connection, optionally supply report_countries (1–10 World Bank codes) for a FREE live preview of the optional paid country comparison: population/GDP/inflation by default, or up to six selected historical indicators over ten years, aligned JSON and CSV, definitions and source evidence. Preview reports price, missing cells, availability and the exact HTTP purchase path; it never signs or pays. Existing data tools remain free. Buying requires an authorized x402 HTTP client, not just MCP. Source/schema checks are not independent factual verification.

ParametersJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`language`	No	Response metadata language, English by default or French; original source definitions and notes remain preserved.	en
`report_to`	No	Inclusive last observation year, no later than the last completed calendar year. Supply with report_from and report_indicators; missing observations block purchase.
`report_from`	No	Inclusive first observation year for a custom country preview. Supply with report_to and report_indicators; at most ten years, from 1960 onward.
`report_countries`	No	Optional free preview for these distinct World Bank country codes, e.g. FRA, DEU, ESP. General/economy connections only.
`report_indicators`	No	Custom historical comparison: select up to six of the 22 WDI indicators. Supply report_from and report_to together, up to ten years. Missing cells block payment.

Output Schema

ParametersJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`name`	Yes
`title`	No
`tools`	No
`profile`	No
`version`	No
`capabilities`	No
`available_records`	No
`independently_verified`	No	Official-source checks are not independent factual corroboration.

TDQS

A4.3/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already cover the read-only/idempotent safety profile, and the description layers on real behavioral context the structured fields can't convey: the preview 'never signs or pays,' missing cells block purchase, reports expose price/availability/HTTP purchase path, and source/schema checks are not independent factual verification. This is valuable disclosure beyond annotations.

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?

Front-loads the core purpose and keeps every sentence informative, but the second half is a dense run-on covering preview outputs, pricing, purchase path, and caveats. Slightly crowded, yet nothing is pure filler.

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?

For an unusual dual-purpose tool (catalog inspection plus paid-data preview) with an output schema already covering return values, the description supplies the needed context: scope, the free-vs-paid boundary, preview contents, payment prerequisites, and an analytical caveat.

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%, so the baseline is 3, but the description adds cross-parameter semantics the schema doesn't: report_from/report_to must be supplied together with report_indicators, missing observations block purchase, and report_countries triggers a free preview only on general/economy connections. That is meaningful added meaning.

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?

States a concrete verb+resource ('Inspect this connection's scope, tools and access policy') and adds a second, clearly described capability (free country-comparison preview). It implies differentiation from the data siblings by noting 'Existing data tools remain free,' but never names a sibling, so it stops short of a 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?

Gives clear when-to-use guidance: call with no arguments for the plain catalog, or supply report_countries on the general/economy connection for a preview, and explicitly states buying needs an authorized x402 HTTP client 'not just MCP.' No explicit when-NOT-to-use beyond that constraint, so not a 5.

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

get_evidenceA

Read-onlyIdempotent

Inspect

Retrieve the source JSON snapshot and SHA-256 digest for a currently available record. The digest proves snapshot integrity, not factual truth.

ParametersJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`id`	Yes	Record id returned by a DatoQA data response; returns the retained source snapshot for that record.

Output Schema

ParametersJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`notice`	Yes
`sha256`	Yes
`record_id`	Yes
`hash_scope`	Yes
`source_url`	Yes
`first_observed_at`	Yes
`source_payload_json`	Yes

TDQS

A3.6/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive and closed-world, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuinely non-obvious context the annotations cannot: the digest proves snapshot integrity and not factual truth, and the snapshot is only available for a record that is currently available. That constraint on availability is useful behavioral disclosure.

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, no waste, and the most important scoping fact (snapshot plus digest for an available record) is front-loaded before the integrity caveat.

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?

An output schema exists, so return structure need not be explained; the description nonetheless names the returned artifacts (snapshot, digest). The main remaining omission is what the caller should do when the record is no longer available, but for a one-parameter read tool with rich annotations and an output schema this is close to complete.

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% and the single id parameter is already documented in the schema (record id from a DatoQA data response, including the accepted pattern). The description adds no format or sourcing detail beyond that, so the baseline 3 for full schema coverage applies.

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?

States a specific verb and resource pair: retrieve the source JSON snapshot plus its SHA-256 digest for a record. It is meaningfully distinguishable from the sibling get_record (this returns provenance/evidence, not the record payload), but it never names that sibling, so the differentiation is left implicit.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

There is no explicit when-to-use statement and no alternative is named; an agent must infer from the word 'evidence' and 'currently available' that this is the provenance/verification path rather than the normal data-retrieval path. Relative to get_record, which presumably serves the same record space, this is a real gap.

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

get_public_holidaysA

Read-onlyIdempotent

Inspect

Get published public-holiday entries for one calendar and year or exact inclusive local date. Use a known region id directly (fr-metropole, gb-england-and-wales, hk-general, oh-de); consult list_holiday_regions only if scope is unknown. OpenHolidays entries retain multilingual names, subdivisions and half-day scope; set nationwide_only=true to exclude regional entries. Government feeds and third-party curated calendars are explicitly distinguished. Empty results do not establish working days; future dates can change, and aggregator dates are not individually government-confirmed.

ParametersJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`date`	No	Exact local calendar date YYYY-MM-DD, for example 2026-12-28; cannot be combined with year.
`year`	No	Calendar year; defaults to the current year. Only published years are available. Omit when date is supplied.
`region`	Yes	Calendar identifier from list_holiday_regions, for example gb-england-and-wales.
`nationwide_only`	No	For OpenHolidays country calendars, keep only entries marked nationwide by the source. Default false includes regional entries with their scopes. Government calendars retain their named territory scope.

Output Schema

ParametersJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`year`	No
`items`	Yes
`notice`	No
`region`	No
`status`	Yes	Read this before using values; a successful transport does not establish data availability.
`returned`	Yes	Domain-specific result count, not necessarily the number of stored records in items.
`directory`	No
`requested_date`	No
`available_years`	No
`independently_verified`	No	Official-source checks are not independent factual corroboration.

TDQS

A4.9/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already cover the safety profile (readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive), yet the description adds real behavioral context beyond them: multilingual names/subdivisions/half-day scope are retained, government feeds vs third-party curated calendars are distinguished, future dates are mutable, and aggregator dates are not individually government-confirmed.

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?

Four dense sentences with the core lookup scope front-loaded, then routing guidance, then parameter behavior, then result caveats. No filler or restated name/title; each sentence carries distinct operational information.

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?

With an output schema present and annotations covering safety, the description supplies the remaining gaps: region discovery path, nationwide_only semantics, and the reliability caveats about mutable future dates and aggregator sourcing. Nothing an agent needs to call it correctly is missing.

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%, so the baseline is 3. The description still adds value by giving concrete known region ids (fr-metropole, gb-england-and-wales, hk-general, oh-de) and spelling out the effect of nationwide_only=true (exclude regional entries, government calendars keep territory scope), which goes mildly beyond the schema's own wording.

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?

States a specific verb, resource and lookup scope ('published public-holiday entries for one calendar and year or exact inclusive local date'), and implicitly distinguishes itself from list_holiday_regions as the enumeration sibling. An agent can tell exactly what it retrieves and at what granularity without opening the schema.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

Explicit routing: 'Use a known region id directly ... consult list_holiday_regions only if scope is unknown' names the alternative and the condition that selects it. It also warns that empty results do not establish working days, which is a usage caveat rather than just a description.

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

get_recordA

Read-onlyIdempotent

Inspect

Get an unexpired record with provenance and its explicit verification level. Source/schema validation is not independent factual verification.

ParametersJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`id`	Yes	Opaque record id returned by a DatoQA data response. Reuse it exactly; do not invent an id.

Output Schema

ParametersJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`id`	Yes
`data`	Yes	Source-specific payload; inspect units, observation dates, nulls and source notes.
`domain`	Yes
`citation`	Yes
`freshness`	Yes
`provenance`	Yes
`display_label`	No

TDQS

A3.5/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already cover read-only, idempotent, non-destructive behavior, so the bar is lower. The description adds two genuinely useful behavioral facts not in the annotations: records returned are unexpired, and source/schema validation must not be mistaken for independent factual verification. It stops short of describing error behavior for a missing/expired id.

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 short sentences, the primary purpose front-loaded, with the interpretive caveat placed second. No filler, no restating of the tool name or schema.

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?

An output schema exists so return values need not be explained, and annotations cover the safety profile. The gap is routing: with 24 siblings an agent is given no cue for choosing this tool, and nothing is said about what happens when the record is expired or absent.

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?

There is exactly one parameter and schema_description_coverage is 100%; the schema already explains the id is opaque, must be reused exactly, and must not be invented. The description adds no parameter guidance at all, so the baseline 3 for fully-covered schemas applies.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Get an unexpired record') plus the returned payload ('provenance and its explicit verification level'). The 'unexpired' qualifier meaningfully narrows scope beyond the bare tool name, though it never distinguishes itself from any of the 24 sibling get_*/list_* tools.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

There is no statement of when to use this versus the sibling retrieval tools (get_evidence, catalog, etc.), nor any prerequisite or exclusion. Usage is only implied by the required id parameter. The closing caveat is about interpreting results, not about tool selection.

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

list_holiday_regionsA

Read-onlyIdempotent

Inspect

Discover available public-holiday calendars and exact region ids, published years, source kind and freshness. Includes FR/UK/HK government feeds and international OpenHolidays curated entries. Use when country/region/year coverage is unknown; otherwise call get_public_holidays directly. Configured calendars are not proof of available data. International coverage is incomplete.

ParametersJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No parameters

Output Schema

ParametersJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`notice`	Yes
`regions`	Yes
`endpoint`	Yes
`region_count`	Yes
`count_meaning`	Yes
`configured_regions`	Yes
`source_event_count`	Yes
`independently_verified`	Yes	Official-source checks are not independent factual corroboration.
`refresh_interval_seconds`	Yes
`max_collection_age_seconds`	Yes

TDQS

A4.6/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive, closed-world, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuinely non-obvious behavioral caveats: 'Configured calendars are not proof of available data' and 'International coverage is incomplete,' which warn about data-coverage semantics an agent cannot infer from annotations or schema. It stops short of describing pagination or output shape, but the output schema exists.

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?

Four sentences, all earning their place, with the primary purpose front-loaded before the routing guidance and caveats. Slightly dense but no filler or repetition.

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?

Combined with an output schema (which carries return-value detail) and annotations (which carry the safety profile), the description supplies everything else an agent needs: purpose, selection rule, named alternative, and data-coverage caveats. Nothing material is missing for a zero-parameter catalog 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?

The tool takes zero parameters and the input schema is an empty object, so the baseline is 4. There is nothing parameter-related for the description to compensate for, and it correctly implies a no-argument discovery call.

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 names a specific verb (Discover) and resource (available public-holiday calendars and exact region ids, published years, source kind, freshness), and explicitly distinguishes itself from the sibling get_public_holidays. An agent can immediately tell this is a catalog-discovery tool rather than a data-fetch tool.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

It states the exact condition for use ('when country/region/year coverage is unknown') and routes the agent to the alternative ('otherwise call get_public_holidays directly'). This is explicit when/when-not plus the named alternative, the top of the scale.

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

Tool Schema Changelog

Recent tool additions, removals, and schema changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

1 tool updateOct 7, 2026

Changedcatalog3 fields changed

addedInput schema / properties / language / description

Added value: +"Response metadata language, English by default or French; original source definitions and notes remain preserved."

addedInput schema / properties / report_from / description

Added value: +"Inclusive first observation year for a custom country preview. Supply with report_to and report_indicators; at most ten years, from 1960 onward."

addedInput schema / properties / report_to / description

Added value: +"Inclusive last observation year, no later than the last completed calendar year. Supply with report_from and report_indicators; missing observations block purchase."

1 tool updateSep 28, 2026

Changedcatalog3 fields changed

addedInput schema / properties / report_from

Added value: +{
+  "maximum": 9007199254740991,
+  "minimum": 1960,
+  "type": "integer"
+}

addedInput schema / properties / report_indicators

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Custom historical comparison: select up to six of the 22 WDI indicators. Supply report_from and report_to together, up to ten years. Missing cells block payment.",
+  "items": {
+    "enum": [
+      "population",
+      "gdp",
+      "gdp_per_capita",
+      "gdp_real",
+      "gdp_growth",
+      "inflation",
+      "life_expectancy",
+      "fertility",
+      "urban_population",
+      "internet_users",
+      "electricity_access",
+      "unemployment",
+      "renewable_energy",
+      "forest_area",
+      "agricultural_land",
+      "trade",
+      "exports",
+      "imports",
+      "infant_mortality",
+      "basic_drinking_water",
+      "basic_sanitation",
+      "primary_completion"
+    ],
+    "type": "string"
+  },
+  "maxItems": 6,
+  "minItems": 1,
+  "type": "array"
+}

addedInput schema / properties / report_to

Added value: +{
+  "maximum": 2025,
+  "minimum": -9007199254740991,
+  "type": "integer"
+}

1 tool updateSep 28, 2026

Changedcatalog3 fields changed

addedInput schema / $schema

Added value: +"https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema"

addedInput schema / properties / language

Added value: +{
+  "default": "en",
+  "enum": [
+    "en",
+    "fr"
+  ],
+  "type": "string"
+}

addedInput schema / properties / report_countries

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Optional free preview for these distinct World Bank country codes, e.g. FRA, DEU, ESP. General/economy connections only.",
+  "items": {
+    "pattern": "^[A-Z0-9]{3}$",
+    "type": "string"
+  },
+  "maxItems": 10,
+  "minItems": 1,
+  "type": "array"
+}

5 tool updatesSep 28, 2026

Changedcatalog1 field changed

changedOutput schema / $schema

Previous value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"New value: +"https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema"

Changedget_evidence2 fields changed

changedInput schema / $schema

Previous value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"New value: +"https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema"

changedOutput schema / $schema

Previous value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"New value: +"https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema"

Changedget_public_holidays2 fields changed

changedInput schema / $schema

Previous value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"New value: +"https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema"

changedOutput schema / $schema

Previous value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"New value: +"https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema"

Changedget_record2 fields changed

changedInput schema / $schema

Previous value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"New value: +"https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema"

changedOutput schema / $schema

Previous value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"New value: +"https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema"

Changedlist_holiday_regions1 field changed

changedOutput schema / $schema

Previous value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"New value: +"https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema"

3 tool updatesSep 27, 2026

Changedget_public_holidays4 fields changed

addedInput schema / properties / nationwide_only

Added value: +{
+  "description": "For OpenHolidays country calendars, keep only entries marked nationwide by the source. Default false includes regional entries with their scopes. Government calendars retain their named territory scope.",
+  "type": "boolean"
+}

changedInput schema / properties / region / description

Previous value: -"Official calendar identifier from list_holiday_regions, for example gb-england-and-wales."New value: +"Calendar identifier from list_holiday_regions, for example gb-england-and-wales."

changedInput schema / properties / region / enum

Previous value: -[
-  "fr-metropole",
-  "fr-alsace-moselle",
-  "fr-guadeloupe",
-  "fr-guyane",
-  "fr-la-reunion",
-  "fr-martinique",
-  "fr-mayotte",
-  "fr-nouvelle-caledonie",
-  "fr-polynesie-francaise",
-  "fr-saint-barthelemy",
-  "fr-saint-martin",
-  "fr-saint-pierre-et-miquelon",
-  "fr-wallis-et-futuna",
-  "gb-england-and-wales",
-  "gb-scotland",
-  "gb-northern-ireland"
-]New value: +[
+  "fr-metropole",
+  "fr-alsace-moselle",
+  "fr-guadeloupe",
+  "fr-guyane",
+  "fr-la-reunion",
+  "fr-martinique",
+  "fr-mayotte",
+  "fr-nouvelle-caledonie",
+  "fr-polynesie-francaise",
+  "fr-saint-barthelemy",
+  "fr-saint-martin",
+  "fr-saint-pierre-et-miquelon",
+  "fr-wallis-et-futuna",
+  "gb-england-and-wales",
+  "gb-scotland",
+  "gb-northern-ireland",
+  "hk-general",
+  "oh-ad",
+  "oh-al",
+  "oh-at",
+  "oh-be",
+  "oh-bg",
+  "oh-br",
+  "oh-by",
+  "oh-ch",
+  "oh-cz",
+  "oh-de",
+  "oh-ee",
+  "oh-es",
+  "oh-fr",
+  "oh-hr",
+  "oh-hu",
+  "oh-ie",
+  "oh-it",
+  "oh-li",
+  "oh-lt",
+  "oh-lu",
+  "oh-lv",
+  "oh-mc",
+  "oh-md",
+  "oh-mt",
+  "oh-mx",
+  "oh-nl",
+  "oh-pl",
+  "oh-pt",
+  "oh-ro",
+  "oh-rs",
+  "oh-se",
+  "oh-si",
+  "oh-sk",
+  "oh-sm",
+  "oh-va",
+  "oh-za"
+]

changedOutput schema / properties / items / items / properties / provenance / properties / verification_level / enum

Previous value: -[
-  "official_source_and_schema_checked",
-  "method_specific"
-]New value: +[
+  "official_source_and_schema_checked",
+  "public_aggregator_and_schema_checked",
+  "method_specific"
+]

Changedget_record1 field changed

changedOutput schema / properties / provenance / properties / verification_level / enum

Previous value: -[
-  "official_source_and_schema_checked",
-  "method_specific"
-]New value: +[
+  "official_source_and_schema_checked",
+  "public_aggregator_and_schema_checked",
+  "method_specific"
+]

Changedlist_holiday_regions2 fields changed
- addedOutput schema / properties / regions / items / properties / date_confirmation
```
Added value: +{
+  "type": "string"
+}
```
- addedOutput schema / properties / regions / items / properties / source_kind
```
Added value: +{
+  "type": "string"
+}
```

5 tool updatesSep 27, 2026
- First observedcatalog
- First observedget_evidence
- First observedget_public_holidays
- First observedget_record
- First observedlist_holiday_regions

Related MCP Connectors

Business Days A
com.profitpather.tools
Public holidays and working-day maths for 200+ countries, cross-checked across three providers.
Calendar Management Government Data Open Data
41
Inday - Public Holiday API
io.github.gokhanibrikci
Public holiday data for 30+ countries. Check holidays, working days and calendars via AI assistants.
Government Data Search Open Data
2
DatoQA — Economic Indicators A
dev.workers.bhazarstudio.datoqa
Official country economic indicators and annual history, with units, dates, citations and gaps. Datoka portal and connection guide: https://datoka.dev/qa.
Government Data
131
Holidays MCP A
io.github.Lulu-The-Narwhal
Free, keyless public holidays lookup for any country and year, plus single-date holiday checks.
Open Data Government Data Travel & Transportation
21

Related MCP Servers

inday-api
Government Data Open Data Search
gokhanibrikci
A
license
Not graded
quality
C
maintenance
Public holiday data for 30+ countries. Check holidays, working days, and full calendars via AI assistants like Claude and Cursor.
Updated 6 months ago (2026-04-15 05:36 UTC)
MIT
lookup-holiday
Calendar Management Government Data
encodi
A
license
Not graded
quality
C
maintenance
Real public/bank/school holiday lookup for 206 countries via a rule-based calendar engine (moveable holidays like Easter computed astronomically, not guessed). Priced per call via x402/USDC on Base.
Updated 2 months ago (2026-08-11 22:14 UTC)
MIT
OpenHolidays MCP
Calendar Management Government Data
pipeworx-io
A
license
Not graded
quality
B
maintenance
Enables AI agents to look up public and school holidays across roughly 30 European countries for any date range, including localized holiday names, nationwide status, and regional subdivision coverage. Also lists covered countries and their subdivisions so school-term queries can be scoped to a specific region.
Updated 22 days ago (2026-09-26 20:13 UTC)
19 npm
MIT
holidays-mcp
Open Data Calendar Management Government Data
Lulu-The-Narwhal
A
license
A
quality
C
maintenance
Provides real, official public holiday data for ~100 countries with tools to list holidays for a year and check if a specific date is a holiday. Free, no API key required, powered by Nager.Date.
Updated 2 months ago (2026-08-10 13:54 UTC)
2
MIT

Try in Browser

One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources

Need Help?