first_business_day_of_month

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. The description only states the basic function without disclosing behavioral traits such as whether holidays are considered, how weekends are handled, or how parameters like 'country' and 'subdivision' affect results. This lack of detail undermines safe and effective tool selection.

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?

The description is a single sentence, achieving brevity. However, it sacrifices detail; while the sentence is front-loaded and clear, it omits necessary behavioral context. It is appropriately concise but at the expense of completeness, warranting an average score.

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 the tool's complexity (4 parameters, no output schema, many siblings), the description is insufficiently complete. It lacks explanation of how the result is computed (e.g., shifts from first of month, holiday handling) and does not clarify the role of optional parameters. The description does not adequately support correct tool invocation.

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 75% (3 of 4 parameters have descriptions). The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond the schema. With high coverage, the baseline is 3, and no extra value is provided, so the score remains 3.

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 clearly states the tool's function: 'Returns the first working day of a given month.' The verb 'returns' specifies the action, and the resource 'first working day' is distinct from siblings like 'last_business_day_of_month' and 'next_business_day'. It directly conveys the purpose without ambiguity.

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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. With 13 sibling tools, the agent receives no hints about context, prerequisites, or when not to use it. The usage must be inferred entirely from the tool name and description, which is insufficient.

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