Skip to main content
Glama

Australia/Melbourne clock

by io.github.sadri-dridi
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

tz-australia-melbourne

Current local time in Australia/Melbourne.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
refNoGit ref name; discarded after the shape check
urlNoHTTPS URL to normalize or cite
cityNoCity name for a public weather hint; discarded after the call
feedNoPublic RSS or Atom URL; titles discarded
hostNoPublic hostname
jsonNoJSON text to validate; discarded after the check
pathNoFile path to check; no disk access
zoneNoIANA timezone name
queryNoSearch text; discarded after the length check
websiteNoPublic https website (homepage domain) to check for agent readiness: robots.txt, llms.txt, sitemap.xml, extractable HTML. Bounded, identified, robots-respecting.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / website
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Public https website (homepage domain) to check for agent readiness: robots.txt, llms.txt, sitemap.xml, extractable HTML. Bounded, identified, robots-respecting.",
+  "type": "string"
+}
  2. Added

TDQS

C2.9/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, and the description only names the output. It does not disclose that inputs are optional or mostly discarded (as hinted by schema descriptions like 'discarded after the shape check'), nor does it state that the tool is a read-only, side-effect-free operation. This is a transparency gap, though not a contradiction.

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 efficient sentence with no filler and the key output is front-loaded. It is appropriately concise, though it sacrifices useful behavioral detail.

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?

With no output schema, no annotations, and 10 optional parameters, the description is too sparse. It does not say that the parameters are irrelevant/decoy-like, what the response looks like, or why an agent should choose this over similar timezone siblings. The ambiguity around the parameter list makes the definition incomplete for confident invocation.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 100%, and each parameter already has a one-line description including discard behavior, so the schema carries the burden. The tool description adds no parameter-level meaning, and the connection between the unrelated parameters and the timezone output remains unexplained, but the baseline for such coverage is acceptable.

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 states a specific deliverable—current local time in Australia/Melbourne—and the tool name reinforces the fixed timezone. It lacks an explicit verb but is unambiguous about what the tool returns; it does not, however, contrast itself with siblings like timezone or utc-time.

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?

There is no guidance about when to use this tool versus siblings such as timezone or utc-time, nor any explanation of how the 10 optional parameters relate to the time output. The intended usage must be inferred from the tool name alone.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

All Australia/Melbourne clock toolsInspect
Try in Browser
One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources