Skip to main content
Glama

timezone

Current time in a named IANA timezone.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
urlNoHTTPS URL to normalize or cite
hostNoPublic hostname
jsonNoJSON text to validate; discarded after the check
zoneNoIANA timezone name

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A3.7/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description must carry behavioral disclosure. It conveys that the operation is a read-only time lookup, but does not describe the return format, timezone database behavior, or handling of invalid/absent zone values.

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 clean sentence that earns its place, front-loading the tool's core purpose with no filler words or structural clutter.

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?

The definition is incomplete for the messy context: no annotations, no output schema, and an input schema containing unrelated optional parameters. The description does not explain the expected return value or resolve the parameter ambiguity, leaving an agent to guess how to invoke it correctly.

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?

Although schema coverage is 100%, three of the four parameters (url, host, json) describe operations unrelated to timezone lookup and are optional. The description does not clarify that zone is the sole relevant parameter, so an agent receives misleading or ambiguous parameter guidance.

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?

The description states a specific action and resource: returning the current time for a named IANA timezone. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like utc-time (UTC current time) and iana-zones (zone names).

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?

It clearly implies the use case: when the agent needs the current time in an IANA zone rather than UTC. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the IANA qualifier gives enough context to route correctly among the siblings.

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

C2.8/5.0
Disambiguation3/5

Most tools are distinct, but there is overlap in the URL/time clusters: citation, normalize-url, and domain-shape all involve host/scheme data, while timezone and utc-time both return current time. The vague compatibility tool also adds ambiguity.

Naming Consistency2/5

Names mix noun-only forms (citation, timezone), verb-object forms (inspect-robots, normalize-url, validate-json), and compound nouns (iana-zones, status-catalog, utc-time). There is no consistent naming convention across the set.

Tool Count5/5

Ten tools is a reasonable count for a general-purpose utility server. Each tool is lightweight and the set is neither bloated nor too sparse.

Completeness3/5

The domain is an open-ended 'utility index,' so completeness is hard to define; it covers URL handling, time, HTTP status, robots, and JSON validation. However, obvious common utilities like hashing, encoding, or string operations are absent, leaving notable gaps for a general utility server.

Resources