get_long_weekends

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

Annotations already declare the tool as read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive. The description adds behavioral context: it is computed from federal public holidays from Nager.Date, and cantonal holidays are ignored. This goes beyond annotations.

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 fairly structured with a main sentence and XML tags, but it contains redundancy (the note about federal holidays appears twice). It could be more concise.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity (one parameter), annotations, and existence of an output schema, the description adequately covers purpose, usage, and behavioral limitations. It is mostly complete, though it does not describe the output structure.

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?

The input schema has 0% description coverage, but the description implies the 'year' parameter through the use case ('which long weekends exist this year'). However, the description does not explicitly document the parameter or its constraints, so it provides minimal additional meaning.

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 clearly states 'Return Swiss long weekends and the bridge days needed to create them', using a specific verb and resource. The use case further clarifies the tool's purpose, distinguishing it from siblings like get_public_holidays.

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 provides a use case for planning bridge days and notes the limitation of only considering federal holidays. It implies when to use this tool, but does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use it.

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