add_business_days

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

With no annotations, the description discloses key behaviors: it moves forward/backward, skips weekends and public holidays (implied by country/subdivision), allows negative numbers, and returns unchanged for zero. However, it does not mention any limitations like maximum range or holiday resolution details.

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?

Three short sentences, front-loaded with primary purpose. Each sentence adds value: main move, negative handling, zero case. No filler or redundant text.

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?

Given no output schema, the description could clarify return format (likely date string). But it covers core logic well. Context of 4 params and no enums/nesting makes this fairly complete for a calendar calculation tool.

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?

All 4 parameters are described in the schema (100% coverage). The description adds no extra semantics beyond the schema. For example, negative 'days' is already in schema description. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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?

Description clearly states the tool moves a date by a number of business days, using 'move a number of working days forward or backward from a date'. It explicitly mentions skipping weekends and public holidays, and distinguishes from siblings like next_business_day (single day) and business_days_between (count). The verb 'move' and resource 'working days from a date' are specific.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like next_business_day or previous_business_day. The description implies general offset scenarios but does not set exclusions or prerequisites. For a tool with many date siblings, this is a missed opportunity.

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