Calculates the weekly Torah portion (also called parashat haShavua) for a specified date
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| il | Yes | True if in Israel, false for Diaspora | |
| date | Yes | Gregorian date in yyyy-MM-dd format |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.
Input schema / $schemaRemoved value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"Input schema / additionalPropertiesAdded value: +falseDoes the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It only states that the tool 'calculates' the portion, without disclosing relevant behavior such as the impact of the Israel/Diaspora flag, handling of dates outside the Torah-reading cycle, or the output format.
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 sentence that front-loads the action and object, with no redundant wording or filler. It is appropriately concise for a simple calculation 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?
The tool is simple, the schema covers both required parameters, and the output is inferable from the description. However, with no output schema and no annotation coverage, the description could have added more context about what the returned portion looks like and how the il flag changes the result.
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%, and both parameters already have clear descriptions: date format and the boolean meaning of il. The tool description adds no additional parameter-level meaning, which matches the baseline of 3.
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 uses a specific verb ('Calculates') and names a clear resource ('weekly Torah portion') with a clarifying Hebrew synonym. It is unambiguous about the primary function, but it does not differentiate it from sibling date-based tools such as daf-yomi or jewish-holidays-year.
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?
There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus related calendar tools. Given that the sibling list includes several date-dependent Jewish calendar tools, the description leaves the selection decision entirely to inference.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Each tool has a clearly distinct purpose: two cover bidirectional date conversion, while the others handle unique calendar computations like holidays, Torah portions, Shabbat times, Daf Yomi, and Yahrzeit. There is no overlap or ambiguity between them.
All tool names use lowercase hyphenated words, creating a uniform style. However, some names are verb-led (convert-gregorian-to-hebrew) while others are noun-led (daf-yomi, shabbat-times), which is a minor deviation from a single naming pattern but remains readable and predictable.
With 7 tools, the server is well-scoped for a Jewish calendar domain. Each tool addresses a distinct functionality, and the count fits comfortably within the ideal range for a focused utility server.
The server covers the core Jewish calendar needs: date conversion, annual holidays, Shabbat times, Torah portions, Daf Yomi, and Yahrzeit. A minor gap is the lack of a tool for a specific holiday date lookup (without retrieving the whole year) or more advanced halachic time calculations, but these are workable gaps.