Check whether a body is valid JSON. The body is discarded.
| 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 notes that the body is discarded, implying a non-destructive read-only operation. However, it does not clarify behavior for invalid JSON or any error handling, leaving some behavioral aspects unspecified.
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 concise sentence with no extraneous information, efficiently conveying the core purpose.
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?
The description and schema are incongruent: the irrelevant parameters suggest this tool may be a copy-paste error, and it fails to specify which parameter is the body or how results are returned. The description is incomplete and potentially misleading for an agent.
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 parameter descriptions are largely mismatched: url, host, and zone are described as relating to URL normalization, citation, and timezones, which are irrelevant to JSON validation. Only the json parameter aligns with the tool's purpose, but the presence of misleading descriptions for other parameters severely undermines clarity.
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 checks whether a body is valid JSON, which matches the tool name. However, it does not explicitly identify which parameter corresponds to the body, leaving slight ambiguity.
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, nor are any prerequisites or limitations mentioned. The description is purely functional with no contextual usage hints.
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 functions, but current-time tools overlap: timezone accepts any IANA zone while tz-asia-hong-kong and utc-time are hardcoded special cases, creating redundancy. citation and compatibility also have vague descriptions that could be confused.
Names mix single-word nouns (citation, compatibility, timezone) with hyphenated multi-word phrases (domain-shape, inspect-robots, normalize-url, tz-asia-hong-kong). There is no consistent verb_noun or naming pattern across the set.
11 tools is not inherently excessive, but for a server named 'Asia/Hong_Kong clock' many tools (URL, HTTP, JSON, robots.txt) are unrelated to timekeeping. The set feels like a bundled grab-bag rather than a focused clock utility.
For a clock/time server, the core operations exist (list zones, current time in a zone, UTC), but there is no timezone conversion, formatting, or date arithmetic. Meanwhile the unrelated web/JSON utilities do not compensate for the missing time-focused functionality.