rm_get_holiday

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

Annotations already cover the safety profile with readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false. The description adds minimal behavioral context by indicating this is a single-holiday lookup, but it does not disclose behaviors like not-found handling or whether the holiday_id must come from a prior list call. With complete annotations, this is adequate but not rich.

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, front-loaded sentence with no filler. It states the action and target resource clearly without repeating the schema or annotations.

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, read-only getter with an output schema, the description is mostly sufficient for invocation. However, it lacks guidance on where holiday_id comes from and how this relates to the sibling list tool, leaving minor but real gaps in an agent's full understanding.

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%, so the description must compensate for documenting holiday_id. It does not explain how to obtain a valid holiday_id or clarify the integer/string ambiguity beyond what the schema already shows. The parameter name is self-evident, but the description adds no real semantic value.

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 uses a specific verb ('Get details') and a clear resource ('a specific holiday'), which distinguishes it from sibling tools like rm_list_holidays, rm_create_holiday, rm_update_holiday, and rm_delete_holiday. An agent can immediately tell this is the single-record retrieval endpoint.

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 phrase 'a specific holiday' implies this should be used for single-record lookups rather than listing holidays, but it never explicitly says when to use this versus rm_list_holidays. No exclusions or alternative routing are provided, so the guidance is mostly implicit.

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