public-holidays.getPublicHolidays

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

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the agent knows it's a safe read operation. The description adds minimal behavioral context beyond that, such as 'public holidays' implying a list, but it does not mention any potential variations in holiday definitions or regional differences. Given the strong annotations, this level is adequate.

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, concise sentence that front-loads the purpose. Every word is necessary, and there is no fluff. It is appropriately sized for a simple tool.

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 (no parameters, read-only, has output schema), the description is nearly complete. The output schema likely details the holiday data structure, so the description need not explain it. However, it might be slightly incomplete in not specifying that you need to know the country code or how to get it, but that's a minor gap. Overall, it's adequate.

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 parameters and the description mentions 'country and year' as the criteria, which is not present in the schema. Since there are no parameters in the schema, the description is the sole source of information about what inputs are needed. The description effectively communicates the required parameters (country and year) even though they are not formalized in the schema, earning a high score.

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 'Get public holidays for a country and year' clearly states the action (get) and the resource (public holidays) with relevant filters (country and year). It distinguishes itself from siblings like getAvailableCountries, which retrieves a list of countries, not holidays. However, it could be more specific about the output format or scope, but it is still clear enough.

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 implies usage for retrieving holidays for a particular country and year, which is clear. However, it does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus others, such as getAvailableCountries for country codes first, nor does it mention any prerequisites or alternatives. It lacks explicit 'when to use' or 'when not to use' instructions, but the context is sufficient for a straightforward query.

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