iran_holidays

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

With no annotations provided, the description does the heavy lifting: it discloses that fixed holidays are returned with Gregorian dates while the Hijri-based list is returned WITHOUT dates, and that lunar holidays shift yearly. That is genuine output-behavior context, though it says nothing about ordering, format, or error cases.

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 front-loaded sentence with purpose first and the coverage detail in parentheses; every clause carries information. It is dense with parenthetical enumerations, which slightly hurts scanability.

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?

With no output schema, the description must convey the return shape, and it does explain the two-part result (dated solar holidays plus undated Hijri list). It stops short of describing the actual date formatting or the structure of each entry, leaving some ambiguity for a consumer.

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% and the sole parameter 'year' is undocumented in the schema, so the description must compensate. It does so partially by stating the year is a Jalali year (not Gregorian), which is the key disambiguation, but it adds no guidance on the 1-3177 range or required format.

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 names a specific resource (Iranian public holidays) scoped to a Jalali year, and enumerates exactly which fixed solar holidays are covered (Nowruz, 14-15 Khordad, 22 Bahman, 29 Esfand). It is easily distinguished from the neighboring iran_business_days and jalali_year_info tools.

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?

It implies when the tool applies by explaining the data model (fixed solar holidays vs. Hijri-based ones), and warns that lunar holidays need the official annual calendar. However, it never names an alternative tool or states when a caller should prefer a different sibling for business-day or year-level information.

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