A
licenseA
qualityD
maintenanceAccess the time in any timezone and get the current local time
1
42
MIT
Time & Astronomy
Server Details
Current time by timezone, astronomy events, and moon phases
- Status
- Healthy
- Last Tested
- Transport
- Streamable HTTP
- URL
Glama MCP Gateway
Connect through Glama MCP Gateway for full control over tool access and complete visibility into every call.
MCP client
Glama
MCP server
Full call logging
Every tool call is logged with complete inputs and outputs, so you can debug issues and audit what your agents are doing.
Tool access control
Enable or disable individual tools per connector, so you decide what your agents can and cannot do.
Managed credentials
Glama handles OAuth flows, token storage, and automatic rotation, so credentials never expire on your clients.
Usage analytics
See which tools your agents call, how often, and when, so you can understand usage patterns and catch anomalies.
100% free. Your data is private.
Tool Definition Quality
A3.7/5.0
Tool DescriptionsB
Average 3.6/5 across 3 of 3 tools scored.
Server CoherenceA
Disambiguation5/5
Each tool targets a distinct aspect: get_astronomy handles daily sun/moon times, get_current_time provides current time in any timezone, and get_moon_phases covers moon phases and illumination. There is no functional overlap.
Naming Consistency5/5
All tools follow the consistent pattern 'get_<noun>' with snake_case, making the naming predictable and readable.
Tool Count3/5
With only three tools, the server is lean but covers core time and astronomy queries. The count is at the lower end of reasonable, but not overly thin.
Completeness4/5
The toolkit covers essential time and astronomy needs (current time, sun/moon times, moon phases), but lacks time zone conversion, planetary data, or specific date queries for astronomy events, representing minor gaps.
Available Tools
3 toolsget_astronomyAInspect
Get sunrise, sunset, and twilight times for any location using US Naval Observatory data. Also returns moonrise and moonset.
ParametersJSON Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| tz | No | UTC offset in hours (e.g. -5 for EST, 1 for CET). Default: 0 (UTC) | |
| lat | No | Latitude (default: 40.7128 — New York City) | |
| lon | No | Longitude (default: -74.0060 — New York City) | |
| date | No | Date in YYYY-MM-DD format (default: today) |
Tool Definition Quality
A3.7/5.0
Behavior3/5
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations exist, so the description must carry the full burden. It discloses the data source and outputs, but omits details like data freshness, accuracy bounds, required permissions, or that all parameters are optional with defaults.
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?
Two sentences with zero waste. The main purpose is front-loaded, and the additional moon info is appended efficiently.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Completeness3/5
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
No output schema exists, yet the description does not explain the return format (e.g., whether times are in local or UTC, what 'twilight times' includes). Given low complexity, it is adequate but could be more complete.
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 coverage is 100% with each parameter described. The description adds no extra meaning beyond 'any location' and implicit date-range, thus baseline score of 3 is appropriate.
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 clearly states the tool returns sunrise, sunset, twilight times, plus moonrise/moonset, using US Naval Observatory data. It distinguishes from siblings: get_current_time (current time) and get_moon_phases (phases, not times). Both verb and resource are specific.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Usage Guidelines3/5
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The description implies the tool is for astronomical event times but provides no explicit guidance on when to use it versus siblings, nor any context about prerequisites or exclusions.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
get_current_timeAInspect
Get the current time in any timezone. Returns local datetime, UTC datetime, unix epoch, UTC offset, DST status, day of week, day of year, and week number.
ParametersJSON Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| format | No | Response format: iso (datetime only), unix (epoch only), both (default) | both |
| timezone | No | IANA timezone name (e.g. America/New_York, Europe/London, Asia/Tokyo). Defaults to UTC. | UTC |
Tool Definition Quality
A3.6/5.0
Behavior4/5
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Without annotations, the description carries the burden of disclosing behavior. It lists the returned fields (local datetime, UTC, unix epoch, offset, DST, etc.), indicating a read-only operation, but does not explicitly state safety or limitations. The provided detail is adequate for a simple time tool.
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 concise (two sentences) and front-loaded: first sentence states the core function, second lists outputs. There is no fluff, though a more structured layout could improve readability.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Completeness3/5
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
The description covers the tool's purpose and outputs, but lacks usage guidance and does not describe the output format or error handling. Without an output schema, more detail on return values would improve completeness.
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 coverage is 100%, so the description does not need to add much. It mentions 'timezone' in the purpose but provides no new meaning beyond the schema's parameter descriptions for 'format' and 'timezone'.
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 clearly states the tool's purpose: 'Get the current time in any timezone'. It uses a specific verb and resource, and distinguishes from sibling tools (get_astronomy, get_moon_phases) which address different domains.
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?
No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The sibling tools are listed but not compared, leaving the agent without direction for selection.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
get_moon_phasesBInspect
Get upcoming moon phases (New Moon, First Quarter, Full Moon, Last Quarter) and current moon illumination percentage from the US Naval Observatory.
ParametersJSON Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| date | No | Start date in YYYY-MM-DD format (default: today) | |
| count | No | Number of phases to return (default: 4, max: 99) |
Tool Definition Quality
B3.4/5.0
Behavior3/5
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries the burden but only states it retrieves data from the US Naval Observatory. It lacks details on side effects, caching, or latency, but is adequate for a read-only tool.
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?
The description is a single clear sentence that immediately conveys the tool's purpose, with no unnecessary words.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Completeness4/5
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
The tool is simple with two parameters and no output schema. The description covers the purpose and data source, remaining concise and complete.
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 coverage is 100% and both parameters are well-documented in the schema. The description does not add additional meaning beyond what the schema already provides.
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 clearly states the tool retrieves upcoming moon phases and current illumination, but it does not explicitly distinguish from siblings like 'get_astronomy' or 'get_current_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?
The description does not provide guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor any exclusions or prerequisites.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Claim this connector by publishing a /.well-known/glama.json file on your server's domain with the following structure:
{
"$schema": "https://glama.ai/mcp/schemas/connector.json",
"maintainers": [{ "email": "your-email@example.com" }]
}The email address must match the email associated with your Glama account. Once published, Glama will automatically detect and verify the file within a few minutes.
Control your server's listing on Glama, including description and metadata
Access analytics and receive server usage reports
Get monitoring and health status updates for your server
Feature your server to boost visibility and reach more users
For users:
Full audit trail – every tool call is logged with inputs and outputs for compliance and debugging
Granular tool control – enable or disable individual tools per connector to limit what your AI agents can do
Centralized credential management – store and rotate API keys and OAuth tokens in one place
Change alerts – get notified when a connector changes its schema, adds or removes tools, or updates tool definitions, so nothing breaks silently
For server owners:
Proven adoption – public usage metrics on your listing show real-world traction and build trust with prospective users
Tool-level analytics – see which tools are being used most, helping you prioritize development and documentation
Direct user feedback – users can report issues and suggest improvements through the listing, giving you a channel you would not have otherwise
The connector status is unhealthy when Glama is unable to successfully connect to the server. This can happen for several reasons:
The server is experiencing an outage
The URL of the server is wrong
Credentials required to access the server are missing or invalid
If you are the owner of this MCP connector and would like to make modifications to the listing, including providing test credentials for accessing the server, please contact support@glama.ai.
Discussions
No comments yet. Be the first to start the discussion!
Related MCP Servers
- AlicenseAqualityCmaintenanceEnables timezone conversion, astronomical calculations, and date utilities through natural language, supporting sunrise/sunset, moon phases, business days, and more.91091ISC
- Alicense-qualityCmaintenanceProvides tools to get current time by coordinates, convert time zones, and parse custom dates to ISO format.MIT
- AlicenseCqualityDmaintenanceProvides current time and date information with timezone support and multiple formatting options. Enables AI assistants to answer time-related queries in different timezones with detailed temporal information.217MIT