Day Of The Week
day_of_the_weekRead-onlyIdempotent
Day of week for a date.
Input Schema
TableJSON Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| date | Yes |
Output Schema
TableJSON Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Timeapi Io
Schema Changelog
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.
Changed2 schema fields changed
- added
Input schema / examplesAdded value: +[ + { + "date": "2024-01-15" + }, + { + "date": "2024-12-25" + } +] - changed
Output schema / (root)Previous value: -nullNew value: +{ + "description": "Day of week for specified date", + "type": "object" +}
- First observed
TDQS
C2.9/5.0
Behavior3/5
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint as true, and destructiveHint as false, so the tool is a safe, idempotent read. The description adds no further behavioral details (e.g., output format, date range limits), but annotations cover the main traits.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Conciseness4/5
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is a single concise sentence with no redundancy. It efficiently conveys the core purpose without extraneous text.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Completeness2/5
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Despite the tool's simplicity, the description omits crucial context like the output format or any constraints on the input date. An output schema exists but is not shown; the description should at least hint at what is returned.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Parameters2/5
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
There is one parameter 'date' with type string, but the description does not clarify accepted formats or add meaning beyond the schema. Schema coverage is 0%, so the description should compensate but does not.
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?
The description 'Day of week for a date' clearly states the tool computes the day of the week from a date input. It is distinct from sibling time-related tools like convert_time_zone or current_time, though no explicit differentiation is given.
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?
No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor any prerequisites or exclusions. The description is purely functional without usage context.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Try in Browser
Glama MCP Gateway
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
TDQS
B3.2/5.0
Disambiguation2/5
Several tools overlap heavily: ask_pipeworx, ask_pipeworx_beta, ask_pipeworx_grounded, and deep_research all answer natural-language data questions, and ask_pipeworx_beta is explicitly identical to ask_pipeworx right now. The current_time* variants and multiple Polymarket scanners also create real selection ambiguity, though the memory and subscription tools are clearly distinct.
Naming Consistency3/5
Names are mostly lowercase snake_case and readable, but there is no consistent verb_noun pattern: some are imperative (ask_pipeworx, compare_entities, generate_llms_txt) while others are object-first (entity_profile, recent_changes, pipeworx_trending). Subfamilies like current_time* and polymarket_* are internally consistent, but the overall set follows no predictable convention.
Tool Count2/5
Forty tools is far too many for a server named Timeapi Io; only about nine tools actually relate to time zones and current time. The rest form a sprawling Pipeworx research, prediction-market, memory, and subscription platform, making this a mega-bundle rather than a well-scoped toolset.
Completeness3/5
The time-related surface covers current time, zone conversion, zone metadata, and ISO parsing, but lacks common date math or general formatting operations. The Pipeworx side is quite complete for research and fact-checking, but the mixed domain makes coverage uneven and hard to reason about as a single coherent service.