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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It does disclose genuinely useful behavioral context — cost ($0.005 per call) and payment method (USDC on Base) — which an agent needs before invoking a paid tool. But it says nothing about the return format, pagination, or error behavior for invalid years.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with zero waste; the resource is named first and the pricing detail is parenthetical. Nothing could be cut without losing information.

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?

For a simple one-parameter read tool this is nearly adequate, but with no output schema and no annotations the description should at least hint at what is returned (a list of holiday dates/names) and how it relates to fa_iranHolidayCheck. Those gaps leave the agent guessing.

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 0% and the bare schema only says 'year: number'. The description compensates for the most important ambiguity by specifying the year is Jalali (Solar Hijri), not Gregorian. It does not state format (e.g., 1403 vs 1403.0) or valid range, so the gap is only partially closed.

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?

States a specific verb+resource: 'Official Iranian public holidays for a Jalali year.' An agent knows this returns a holiday list, not a validation. However, it never distinguishes itself from the sibling fa_iranHolidayCheck, which likely serves the adjacent single-date use case.

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance and no mention of the obvious alternative (fa_iranHolidayCheck). The agent must infer from the name alone whether this is the right tool for checking one date versus listing a year's holidays.

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