Company holidays

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and idempotentHint=true, so safety is covered. The description adds two behavioral details beyond the schema: the default range (current calendar year) and the inclusion of multi-day holidays that overlap. These are useful, non-obvious traits that help an agent reason about the result set.

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?

Two sentences, no redundancy, and the primary action is stated first. The default and edge-case behavior are added efficiently without padding. Every clause earns its place.

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 read-only list tool with no required parameters and full schema coverage, the description covers the core behavior and defaults. It does not mention the response format, but the verb 'List' implies a list, and with no output schema, this is a minor gap. An agent can call it correctly without further info.

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%, so both start and end parameters are already documented with formats and defaults. The description reiterates the default but adds no new parameter-specific semantics. The multi-day overlap rule is behavioral, not parameter-focused. Thus a baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 verb ('List'), a clear resource ('company holidays'), and a precise condition ('overlap a date range'). It also defines defaults, making it unambiguous. With no sibling tool for holidays, it stands alone without confusion.

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 clear context on what the tool does and its default behavior, which implies when to use it (when company holiday data is needed). It doesn't explicitly contrast with alternatives like 'whos_out', but the scope is clear enough that an agent can infer its purpose.

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