accelo_count_holidays

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden, yet it discloses nothing about read-only nature, response shape (a count integer), or rate limits. 'Matching the given filters' hints at filtering behavior but is far too thin for a tool with zero annotation coverage.

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 short sentence with no wasted words; the purpose is front-loaded. It is concise, though there is very little content overall to structure.

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 2-parameter tool with 0% schema coverage, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is too sparse — it does not compensate for the missing parameter documentation or explain the count semantics the agent needs.

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 description coverage is 0% and the two parameters ('search', 'filters') are essentially undocumented both in schema and description. The vague reference to 'given filters' does not explain what keys the filters object accepts or how 'search' differs from 'filters'.

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 states a clear verb ('Count') and resource ('holidays'), and the 'matching the given filters' phrase distinguishes it slightly from the sibling accelo_list_holidays. However it does not name that sibling or explain the distinction explicitly, so it sits at the minimum-viable level.

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 guidance about when to use this count endpoint versus accelo_list_holidays, no note that results are unfiltered by default, and no mention of how 'filters' interacts with 'search'. The agent is left to infer usage entirely.

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