Current time in a named IANA timezone.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| url | No | HTTPS URL to normalize or cite | |
| host | No | Public hostname | |
| json | No | JSON text to validate; discarded after the check | |
| zone | No | IANA timezone name |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It reasonably conveys a read-only output by saying 'Current time', and there are no obvious side effects to disclose. However, it does not mention error behavior, output format, or whether the result includes offsets, so transparency is only partial.
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, short sentence and is easy to scan. It is not padded with irrelevant details, though the brevity prevents it from addressing the misleading schema fields or usage alternatives.
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 tool with four parameters, no required fields, no output schema, and siblings like utc-time, the description is too thin to fully guide invocation. It does not indicate which parameter to pass, what output format to expect, or how to handle invalid zones, so an agent could plausibly select the wrong parameter.
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?
Although schema coverage is 100%, three of the four schema properties (url, host, json) have descriptions clearly borrowed from unrelated tools like normalization/validation, and the tool description does not clarify that zone is the relevant parameter. The zone property's schema description already says 'IANA timezone name', so the tool description adds no semantic value beyond the schema and leaves confusing fields unexplained.
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 returns the current time for a named IANA timezone, which is a non-tautological and identifiable purpose. It distinguishes itself from siblings like iana-zones and utc-time by referencing both 'current time' and 'IANA timezone', though it stops short of explicitly contrasting those siblings.
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?
The description gives no guidance about when to use this tool versus utc-time or iana-zones, and it does not explain what happens if an invalid or missing zone is provided. The only implied usage is 'named IANA timezone', leaving the agent without clear routing or prerequisite information.
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.
Most tools have distinct purposes, such as byte-count, validate-json, and utc-time. However, citation and normalize-url both handle URLs, and timezone and utc-time both provide time information, which could lead to occasional misselection.
Names are mostly lowercase with hyphens, but the pattern is inconsistent: some are nouns (byte-count, timezone, status-catalog) while others are verbs (inspect-robots, normalize-url, validate-json). There is no clear verb_noun or noun_verb convention across the set.
11 tools is a reasonable count for a utility server covering URLs, time, robots, and data validation. Each tool does something different, though a few are quite trivial, making the set slightly broad but not excessive.
The tools cover several common utility categories like URL normalization, current time, timezone lookup, and JSON validation. However, the scope is broad and shallow, leaving obvious gaps such as domain lookups, HTTP request mechanics, or date formatting, and there is no unifying workflow to judge full coverage.