schulferien

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It adds useful context by naming the authoritative source ('bmb.gv.at') and the school-year scope ('2026/27'), but it does not explicitly state that the operation is read-only or describe the return format and error behavior.

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 wasted words. It efficiently states the resource, scope, and source.

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 simple two-parameter lookup with no output schema and no annotations, the description supplies key context (source and school year) but omits return-value details and usage guidance. It is minimally adequate but not fully complete.

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 should compensate for undocumented parameters. It mentions the state and school-year concepts, but those are already conveyed by the schema's property names, enum, and default; it adds little semantic detail about parameter formats, optionality, or expected values.

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 states a specific resource ('Schulferien') scoped per federal state ('je Bundesland') and school year ('Schuljahr 2026/27'), with a named source ('Quelle bmb.gv.at'). It does not explicitly distinguish itself from sibling tools such as 'feiertage', so it is clear but lacks sibling routing.

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 gives no when-to-use guidance, no exclusions, and no alternatives among siblings like 'feiertage'. It only identifies the data the tool returns, leaving the agent to infer when this tool is appropriate.

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