Temporal-MCP

temporal_tick

Advance the temporal clock for a thread and return a snapshot (now / prev / gap / day_rollover / fresh_thread). Call once per user turn. Pass a stable thread_key (e.g. the conversation ID) so gap deltas remain meaningful across page reloads.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`tz_name`	No	Display name for the timezone (e.g. 'MDT'). Cosmetic; appears in the rendered header.
`client_id`	No	Namespace tag (e.g. 'caweb', 'cursor'). Defaults to 'mcp'.
`thread_key`	No	Stable thread identifier within this client. For claude.ai web use the conversation ID; for other MCP clients any caller-stable string. If omitted, falls back to the Mcp-Session-Id header.
`tz_offset_minutes`	No	Caller's UTC offset in minutes (e.g. -360 for MDT). Used for day_rollover detection and header formatting. Defaults to 0 (UTC) so day rollover is always honest even if the caller forgets to pass one.

TDQS

A3.5/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. 'Advance the temporal clock' implies mutation, but no details on side effects, persistence, authorization, or reversibility. Minimal beyond return fields.

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

Conciseness5/5

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

Two sentences plus a usage tip, front-loaded with key action and return. No wasted words.

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

Completeness4/5

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

Given 4 params, no output schema, and no annotations, description covers core usage (when to call, key parameter, return snapshot fields). Lacks explicit mention of sibling for read-only case, but otherwise adequate.

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

Parameters4/5

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

Schema coverage is 100%, baseline 3. Description adds meaning: thread_key as stable identifier with fallback, tz_offset_minutes usage for day_rollover, tz_name as cosmetic. Client_id not elaborated. Adds value.

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?

Description states verb 'advance' and resource 'temporal clock for a thread', with return fields listed. Sibling 'temporal_peek' is not mentioned, so no explicit differentiation, but 'advance' contrasts with 'peek'.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

Explicitly says 'Call once per user turn' and to pass a stable thread_key. Provides usage context but no when-not-to-use or exclusion of alternatives. Sibling not referenced.

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

All Temporal-MCP 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

A3.6/5.0

Disambiguation5/5

The two tools, temporal_peek and temporal_tick, have clearly distinct purposes: one reads state without advancing, the other advances the clock. Their descriptions explicitly contrast their roles, eliminating ambiguity.

Naming Consistency5/5

Both tools follow a consistent snake_case pattern with the 'temporal_' prefix, making them predictable and easy to distinguish.

Tool Count4/5

With only 2 tools, the server is minimal but tightly focused on its core functionality. It could benefit from additional tools like reset or configure, but the count is not inappropriate for a narrow domain.

Completeness3/5

The server covers basic read and advance operations, but lacks features like resetting time, configuring tick intervals, or querying history. While sufficient for simple use cases, there are notable gaps for more complex temporal workflows.

Resources

Need Help?