Find long weekend dates for any country and year. Provide a 2-letter country code and optional year to retrieve holiday clusters that create extended breaks.
Get long weekends for a country and year.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| year | No | Year (defaults to current year) | |
| country_code | Yes | 2-letter ISO code |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.11Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden, yet it discloses nothing beyond the purpose line. It does not define what qualifies as a 'long weekend', whether year defaults are applied, whether holidays are included in the output, or how results are ordered. For a read-only lookup the risk is low, but the behavioral gap is real.
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 the resource and scope front-loaded and no filler. It is efficient, though its brevity is closer to under-specification than to sharp concision.
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?
There is no output schema and no annotations, so the description is the only source of context, and it omits what a long weekend means and what the response contains. For a simple two-parameter lookup this is minimally adequate, but an agent cannot predict the shape or definition of results.
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 100% (both 'year' and 'country_code' are documented in the schema, including the current-year default), so the baseline is 3. The description names the same two concepts but adds no format details such as ISO code handling beyond what the schema already states.
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?
States a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('long weekends') scoped to a country and year, so the action is unambiguous. However, it gives no differentiation from close siblings such as 'long_weekends', 'holidays_by_country', and 'holidays_next', which an agent would need to choose between from name alone.
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 guidance on when to use this rather than the near-identical 'long_weekends', 'holidays_by_country', or 'holidays_next' tools. The implicit usage (find long weekends) is derivable from the name, but nothing is stated.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.