korean_holidays

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 implies a read operation and names the returned data, but says nothing about ordering, whether substitute/alternative holidays are included, behavior for invalid or out-of-range years, or timezone assumptions.

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 efficient sentence with the resource and scope front-loaded. Nothing is wasted, though there is little content to begin with.

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 one-parameter lookup tool the core intent is conveyed, but with no annotations, no output schema, and 0% parameter coverage, the description leaves the agent without any information on return shape or edge-case behavior.

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%, so the single 'year' parameter is undocumented in the schema. The description only implies it via '해당 연도(the given year)' and adds no format, range, or validation semantics.

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 (반환합니다/returns) and resource (한국 공휴일 목록/Korean public holiday list) scoped by year. The purpose is clear and distinguishable from siblings like is_korean_business_day, though it does not explicitly name the boundary.

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?

No guidance on when to use this versus is_korean_business_day, which is a closely related holiday/business-day sibling. An agent must infer the split from the names alone.

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