feiertage

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full load and does little: it does not say what the response looks like (date+name pairs? a list? a map?), whether coverage is Austria-wide or per-Bundesland, or how an invalid/out-of-range year is handled. For a lookup tool this is thin but not misleading.

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 filler, and the key qualifier (Österreich, für ein Jahr) is front-loaded. It is efficient to the point of under-specification, but nothing in it is wasted.

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 tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description should at minimum pin down the year format and the shape of the result; it does neither. An agent can guess, but the definition does not make it callable with confidence.

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 only parameter, 'jahr', is an untyped-in-description integer; the description's 'für ein Jahr' hints at the meaning but never states the expected format (e.g., 2025 vs. '25) or the valid range. The one piece of information a caller needs is missing from both schema and description.

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?

Names a specific resource (statutory Austrian public holidays) and a scope (one year), which is enough to tell it apart from schulferien at a glance since 'gesetzliche Feiertage' is not the same as school holidays. It stops short of naming a sibling explicitly, so it is clear but not fully differentiated.

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 statement of when to use this versus schulferien or the other siblings, and no prerequisites given. The only hint is the word 'gesetzliche', which a caller must infer as the dividing line from school holidays.

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