toolforte

Working Days Calculator

working_days_between

Read-onlyIdempotent

Count working days (Mon-Fri) between two dates inclusive, optionally excluding Dutch public holidays. Exact date math for SLA, payroll, and planning questions.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`end`	Yes	YYYY-MM-DD
`start`	Yes	YYYY-MM-DD
`excludeDutchHolidays`	No	Skip Dutch public holidays that fall on a weekday (default true)

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`end`	No
`start`	No
`result`	No	The result, when it is not an object
`totalDays`	No
`weekendDays`	No
`workingDays`	No
`holidaysExcluded`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.

Changed2 schema fields changedSep 5, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / excludeDutchHolidays / description

Added value: +"Skip Dutch public holidays that fall on a weekday (default true)"

changedOutput schema / (root)

Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "$schema": "https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema",
+  "additionalProperties": {},
+  "properties": {
+    "end": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "holidaysExcluded": {
+      "items": {},
+      "type": "array"
+    },
+    "result": {
+      "description": "The result, when it is not an object"
+    },
+    "start": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "totalDays": {
+      "type": "number"
+    },
+    "weekendDays": {
+      "type": "number"
+    },
+    "workingDays": {
+      "type": "number"
+    }
+  },
+  "type": "object"
+}

First observedSep 1, 2026

TDQS

A4.3/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false. The description adds meaningful behavioral detail beyond that: inclusive date boundaries, weekday-only counting, and the optional exclusion of Dutch public holidays. No contradictions with the annotations are present.

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?

The description is two sentences with no redundant filler. The core behavior is front-loaded, followed by the optional holiday flag and intended use cases. Every sentence earns its place.

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 a simple, read-only calculation tool with a complete input schema and an output schema present, the description fully supports correct invocation. Nothing critical about the inputs, scope, or behavior is missing.

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 the schema already documents all parameters and their formats. The description does not provide significant additional parameter-level detail beyond what the schema contains, so a baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 opens with the specific verb+resource ("Count working days between two dates") and clearly defines the scope: weekdays Mon-Fri, inclusive dates, and optional Dutch holiday exclusion. This clearly differentiates it from siblings like dutch_public_holidays, which returns a holiday list rather than computing a count.

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?

The description names concrete use cases ("SLA, payroll, and planning questions"), which tells an agent when this is relevant. It does not explicitly state when to prefer an alternative or exclude other tools, but the context is clear enough for straightforward tool selection.

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

All toolforte tools Inspect

Try in Browser

RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A3.8/5.0

Disambiguation5/5

Every tool targets a distinct resource or action, and the detailed descriptions clearly separate near neighbors like generate_test_bsn versus generate_brp_test_data, read_page versus url_screenshot versus url_to_pdf, and image_compress/convert/resize. Even with 40 tools, there is no real boundary-blurring overlap.

Naming Consistency3/5

All names are snake_case and readable, but the set mixes conventions: verb_noun (generate_*, validate_*), noun_verb (pdf_merge, image_resize), conversion-style names (csv_to_json, html_to_pdf), and bare nouns (base64, qr_code_png). The groups are recognizable, but there is no single predictable pattern.

Tool Count2/5

Forty tools is an oversized surface for an agent to consider on every call, well above the point where tool selection cost starts to hurt. The broad purpose explains the count, but many one-off utilities could be grouped or exposed selectively.

Completeness3/5

The server covers many domains—encoding, Dutch test data, image/PDF handling, memory, and workflows—but several categories are partial: there are no reverse conversions like json_to_csv or html_to_markdown, no PDF text extraction, and no workflow create/update/delete tools. Agents can work around some gaps, but notable operations are missing.

Resources

Need Help?