Common IANA timezone names for clock calls.
| 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?
The description gives no indication of side effects, read-only behavior, or return behavior. With no annotations, the tool's actual behavior is completely undisclosed.
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 short but not effective; it omits essential information. While it is a single sentence, the brevity sacrifices clarity and leaves key aspects unexplained.
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?
Given the sibling tools include timezone, tz-asia-hong-kong, utc-time, validate-json, and normalize-url, this tool's role is unclear. No output schema is provided, and the odd parameter set makes it incomplete for an agent to use correctly.
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?
The schema parameters 'url', 'host', 'json', and 'zone' are only given generic one-word descriptions. For a tool about IANA timezone names, the relevance of 'url', 'host', and 'json' is unexplained, and 'zone' lacks format or usage details.
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 'Common IANA timezone names for clock calls' vaguely suggests a listing of timezone names, but lacks a clear verb and resource scope. It does not distinguish this tool from sibling tools like 'timezone' or 'tz-asia-hong-kong', making its purpose ambiguous.
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?
No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There is no mention of intended scenarios, prerequisites, or comparison with sibling tools.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.