Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

mcp-time

by io.github.mcpcentral-io
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Get Week of Year

get_week_year

Returns the week and ISO week number for a given date.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
dateNoThe date to check. e.g., "2025-03-23"

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed4 schema fields changed
    • removedInput schema / $schema
      Removed value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"
    • removedInput schema / additionalProperties
      Removed value: -false
    • changedInput schema / properties / date / description
      Previous value: -"The date to check (e.g., \"2025-03-23\"). Defaults to current date"New value: +"The date to check. e.g., \"2025-03-23\""
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -{
-  "$schema": "http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#",
-  "additionalProperties": false,
-  "properties": {
-    "isoWeek": {
-      "type": "integer"
-    },
-    "week": {
-      "type": "integer"
-    }
-  },
-  "required": [
-    "week",
-    "isoWeek"
-  ],
-  "type": "object"
-}New value: +null
  2. Changed4 schema fields changed
    • addedInput schema / $schema
      Added value: +"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"
    • addedInput schema / additionalProperties
      Added value: +false
    • changedInput schema / properties / date / description
      Previous value: -"The date to check. e.g., \"2025-03-23\""New value: +"The date to check (e.g., \"2025-03-23\"). Defaults to current date"
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "$schema": "http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#",
+  "additionalProperties": false,
+  "properties": {
+    "isoWeek": {
+      "type": "integer"
+    },
+    "week": {
+      "type": "integer"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "week",
+    "isoWeek"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}
  3. First observed

TDQS

B3.3/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden, and it does signal a pure read/compute operation returning two values. However, it never resolves the ambiguity between 'the week' and 'the ISO week number' (are these two different numbering schemes?), nor does it mention boundary behavior at year edges where ISO weeks diverge from locale weeks. Modest disclosure for a low-risk tool, but the key semantic ambiguity is left open.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no filler; the resource and return values come first and nothing is redundant.

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

Completeness3/5

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

The tool is simple and the description covers the core behavior, but the context signals show 0 required parameters, meaning 'date' is optional, and the description says 'for a given date' without stating what happens when it is omitted (today? error?). That is a real operational gap for a parameter the description implies is needed.

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

Parameters3/5

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

Schema coverage is 100% and the schema already documents the date parameter with a concrete format example ('2025-03-23'), so the description adds nothing beyond it. Baseline 3 applies when the schema does the heavy lifting.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Returns the week and ISO week number for a given date'), so an agent can tell it computes a calendar-derived value rather than returning the current time like current_time or a raw epoch like get_timestamp. It does not explicitly name or contrast with any sibling, so it falls short of 5.

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance, no mention of when to prefer this over current_time, relative_time, or convert_time, and no prerequisites stated. The agent must infer the use case entirely from the name.

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

All mcp-time toolsInspect
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.

Resources