HelpySelf

Find a Time

find_a_time

Propose a few times, send one link, see when everybody can make it A HelpySelf tool (helpyself.com).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`days`	No
`note`	No
`title`	Yes
`locale`	No
`options`	Yes
`timezone`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.

Changed1 schema field changedAug 27, 2026
- addedInput schema / properties / timezone
```
Added value: +{
+  "maxLength": 64,
+  "type": "string"
+}
```
Changed1 schema field changedAug 27, 2026
- changedInput schema / properties / options / maxItems
```
Previous value: -30New value: +366
```
Changed1 schema field changedAug 26, 2026
- addedInput schema / properties / locale
```
Added value: +{
+  "maxLength": 5,
+  "type": "string"
+}
```
AddedAug 26, 2026

TDQS

C2.6/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions a shareable link and availability checking, but it does not disclose whether the tool creates an external poll, sends correspondence, requires authentication, or what happens after proposals are made. For a tool with no safety or side-effect annotations, this is a significant gap.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness3/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The opening sentence is short and front-loaded, but it is followed by a promotional tagline ('A HelpySelf tool (helpyself.com)') that does not help an agent invoke the tool. The description is concise in length but not optimally structured, since useful behavioral and parameter information is absent and the marketing suffix wastes space.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness2/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given six parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is far from complete. It does not explain required inputs, the meaning of the generated link, return behavior, or parameter relationships. An agent would likely need to inspect the schema and still make guesses about how to construct a valid request.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters2/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The schema has 0% description coverage and six parameters, but the description only vaguely hints at proposed times, which loosely maps to 'options'. It does not explain 'title', 'days', 'note', 'locale', or 'timezone', nor does it clarify required inputs or expected formats. The description fails to compensate for the complete lack of schema-level parameter documentation.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the tool's function: proposing multiple times, sharing a link, and seeing availability. This distinguishes it from the mostly unrelated utility siblings. It is slightly informal and includes promotional text, but the core purpose is unambiguous.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description implies use for group scheduling ('see when everybody can make it'), but it provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, no prerequisites, and no exclusions. There are no scheduling-related siblings listed, but the description still does not help an agent decide between tools in any systematic way.

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

All HelpySelf tools Inspect

Try in Browser

RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

C2.6/5.0

Disambiguation3/5

Most tools are clearly single-purpose and described well, but several clusters overlap heavily: image_resizer, bulk_image_resizer, compress_to_size, and image_compressor all address image size or compression, and contrast_checker/contrast_fixer/contrast_grid plus random_picker/wheel_of_names create near-duplicate choices. An agent can often use descriptions to pick, but with 104 tools the boundary between close options is easy to mis-select.

Naming Consistency4/5

Overall the naming is consistent snake_case with strong noun-operator patterns like pdf_merge, image_converter, and barcode_generator. Minor deviations such as what_is_my_ip, days_until_christmas, send_a_secret, and request_a_file break the pattern slightly, but they remain understandable.

Tool Count1/5

104 tools far exceeds the reasonable scope for a single MCP server and hits the '50+' extreme-mismatch threshold. This creates huge prompt overhead and makes tool selection a major obstacle, especially since most tools are trivial standalone utilities rather than related operations.

Completeness3/5

The server covers many categories: text, PDFs, images, files, calculations, generators, conversions, and network utilities, and no obvious workflow dead-ends appear within those tools. But because it is a flat grab-bag rather than a scoped domain, several neighboring utility categories are missing or unevenly represented, such as CSS/JS compression, PDF text extraction, and broader date or currency workflows.

Resources

Need Help?