tick-mcp
Server Details
A time server that keeps your AI honest about time. Real clock + drift guard, zero dependencies.
- Status
- Healthy
- Last Tested
- Transport
- Streamable HTTP
- URL
Glama MCP Gateway
Connect through Glama MCP Gateway for full control over tool access and complete visibility into every call.
Full call logging
Every tool call is logged with complete inputs and outputs, so you can debug issues and audit what your agents are doing.
Tool access control
Enable or disable individual tools per connector, so you decide what your agents can and cannot do.
Managed credentials
Glama handles OAuth flows, token storage, and automatic rotation, so credentials never expire on your clients.
Usage analytics
See which tools your agents call, how often, and when, so you can understand usage patterns and catch anomalies.
Tool Definition Quality
Average 4.7/5 across 2 of 2 tools scored.
The two tools have clearly distinct purposes: 'now' returns the current date and time, while 'since' calculates relative time from a given timestamp. There is no overlap or ambiguity.
Both tool names are single words in lowercase, following a simple, consistent naming style. No mixed conventions or irregularities.
With only 2 tools, the server is tightly scoped to basic date/time utilities. This is appropriate for its purpose, as additional tools would be unnecessary for the core functionality.
The tool set covers the essential operations for a time utility: getting current time and computing relative time. A minor gap might be lack of timezone conversion or formatting, but it is largely complete for common use cases.
Available Tools
2 toolsnowAInspect
Get the REAL current date and time. Call this at the start of a reply and before using any relative time words (yesterday, tomorrow, tonight, next week). Never guess time from context. NEVER write a clock time in your reply that did not come from this tool's output in THIS turn — a timestamp without a fresh call is a hallucination, even if it plausibly continues from an earlier one. ALWAYS pass the user's IANA timezone — this server is remote, so without it you get UTC, not the user's local time.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| timezone | No | The user's IANA timezone, e.g. Europe/Warsaw. Omitting it returns UTC. |
Tool Definition Quality
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations exist, so the description fully carries the burden. It warns about hallucination, emphasizes freshness, and explains that without timezone the server returns UTC. All behavioral traits are disclosed.
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 slightly lengthy but each sentence adds value. It is front-loaded with the core purpose and structured with clear warnings. Could be slightly more concise but remains effective.
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 optional parameter, no output schema), the description is complete. It covers purpose, usage, parameter semantics, and behavioral warnings without gaps.
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 describes timezone as a string. Description adds value by explaining that omitting it yields UTC and that it should be the user's IANA timezone. This provides context beyond the schema.
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 the tool 'Get the REAL current date and time' and specifies its purpose, distinguishing it from guessing time from context. It is specific and actionable.
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?
Explicit instructions: 'Call this at the start of a reply and before using any relative time words' and a strong prohibition against using timestamps without a fresh call. Provides clear when-to-use and when-not-to-use guidance.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
sinceAInspect
How long ago (or from now) a given ISO-8601 timestamp is, in human form ('3h 42m ago'). Use to check whether an event was really 'yesterday'. Include the UTC offset in the timestamp.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| timestamp | Yes | ISO-8601, e.g. 2026-07-11T09:30:00+02:00 |
Tool Definition Quality
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations exist, but the description discloses the tool is a read-only conversion (returns human form), handles both past and future timestamps (via 'ago'/'from now'), and requires ISO-8601 format. Lacks mention of error cases but adequate for a simple utility.
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?
Three concise sentences with no redundant text. Key purpose is front-loaded, and each sentence provides distinct useful information: purpose, example output, usage tip, and parameter requirement.
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 simple tool with one parameter, no output schema, and no nested objects, the description fully covers functionality, input requirements, and a concrete use case. No aspect is missing given the tool's straightforward nature.
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 covers the single parameter with ISO-8601 format and example. Description adds value by emphasizing inclusion of UTC offset, which is not otherwise stressed. Schema coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3; the additional clarity raises it to 4.
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 the tool converts an ISO-8601 timestamp to a human-readable relative time string, with an example output '3h 42m ago', and distinguishes from sibling tool 'now' by specifying the input format and use case.
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?
Explicitly advises using it to check if an event was 'yesterday' and to include UTC offset, providing clear context. Does not contrast with sibling 'now' or specify when not to use, but the guidance is sufficient for the simple tool.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Claim this connector by publishing a /.well-known/glama.json file on your server's domain with the following structure:
{
"$schema": "https://glama.ai/mcp/schemas/connector.json",
"maintainers": [{ "email": "your-email@example.com" }]
}The email address must match the email associated with your Glama account. Once published, Glama will automatically detect and verify the file within a few minutes.
Control your server's listing on Glama, including description and metadata
Access analytics and receive server usage reports
Get monitoring and health status updates for your server
Feature your server to boost visibility and reach more users
For users:
Full audit trail – every tool call is logged with inputs and outputs for compliance and debugging
Granular tool control – enable or disable individual tools per connector to limit what your AI agents can do
Centralized credential management – store and rotate API keys and OAuth tokens in one place
Change alerts – get notified when a connector changes its schema, adds or removes tools, or updates tool definitions, so nothing breaks silently
For server owners:
Proven adoption – public usage metrics on your listing show real-world traction and build trust with prospective users
Tool-level analytics – see which tools are being used most, helping you prioritize development and documentation
Direct user feedback – users can report issues and suggest improvements through the listing, giving you a channel you would not have otherwise
The connector status is unhealthy when Glama is unable to successfully connect to the server. This can happen for several reasons:
The server is experiencing an outage
The URL of the server is wrong
Credentials required to access the server are missing or invalid
If you are the owner of this MCP connector and would like to make modifications to the listing, including providing test credentials for accessing the server, please contact support@glama.ai.
Discussions
No comments yet. Be the first to start the discussion!