findtime.io MCP Server

Get the current time

get_current_time

Read-onlyIdempotent

Returns the current local time for one city, location query, or IANA time zone. Ambiguous or unknown locations return clarification candidates. Country-name queries may resolve through a canonical city. This endpoint accepts locations rather than relative-date questions and does not perform conversions or meeting searches.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "get_current_time"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`city`	No	City name such as "Tokyo".
`query`	No	Free-form location query, country name, or timezone abbreviation.
`timezone`	No	Direct IANA timezone, such as "Europe/London".
`_endUserId`	No	Optional opaque per-call end-user attribution token populated by the MCP host, not the LLM. Accepts a non-PII hash or token, excluding raw email addresses, names, or platform user IDs.
`countryCode`	No	Optional ISO country hint for ambiguous city names.
`candidateLimit`	No	Page size for namesake candidates. Default 6. The response contains pagination information for additional candidates.
`candidateOffset`	No	Number of namesake candidates to skip, as supplied by the previous response pagination.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedNov 2, 2026

TDQS

A4.4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuinely non-obvious behavior beyond the schema: ambiguous or unknown locations return clarification candidates rather than failing, country names may resolve through a canonical city, and candidate results are paginated. Only the exact response shape is left implicit, which is reasonable given there is no output schema.

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?

Four sentences, front-loaded with the core behavior, then ambiguity handling, then scope exclusions. No filler and no repetition of the title.

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?

With 7 all-optional parameters and no output schema, the description must carry a lot, and it covers input modes, ambiguity handling, pagination existence, and scope exclusions. It stops short of describing the returned time object (formatted string vs. UTC offset vs. DST flag), which would be needed for fully confident downstream use, but that is a modest gap given the tool's simplicity.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description goes beyond the schema by framing city/query/timezone as interchangeable input modes for the same lookup and by explaining that the candidate-related parameters exist because ambiguous inputs yield multiple namesake results with pagination — semantics the per-parameter descriptions only hint at individually.

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

Purpose5/5

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

States a specific verb and resource ('Returns the current local time') plus the accepted input modes (city, location query, IANA time zone). The final sentence explicitly distinguishes it from conversion and meeting-search capabilities, which is exactly what an agent needs to separate it from convert_time, find_meeting_time, and answer_time_question.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

The description gives clear when-not guidance: 'does not perform conversions or meeting searches' and 'accepts locations rather than relative-date questions'. It does not name the specific sibling tools (convert_time, answer_time_question) that should be used instead, so routing still requires the agent to pattern-match on capability names rather than an explicit pointer.

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

All findtime.io MCP Server tools Inspect

Try in Browser

One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.