Convert a given instant from any source timezone into several target time zones, defaulting to ten major zones, to compare global times at once.
Show one instant across several timezones (defaults to ten major zones).
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| zones | No | ||
| datetime | No | now | |
| from_timezone | No | UTC |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It usefully discloses that omitting zones yields ten major zones (explaining the null default), but says nothing about timezone string format, DST handling, or error behavior. One meaningful trait is disclosed, but significant behavioral context is missing.
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?
A single, front-loaded sentence with zero filler, and the key behavioral default is parenthetical and easy to scan.
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?
An output schema exists so return values needn't be described, but for a 3-parameter tool with 0% schema coverage and no annotations, the description omits critical input semantics (datetime and from_timezone formats and defaults). It is not complete enough to invoke confidently without guessing.
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?
Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate for all three parameters. It only clarifies zones (defaults to ten major zones); datetime and from_timezone are left entirely unexplained, including expected formats and the relationship between datetime and from_timezone.
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?
States a specific verb (Show) and resource (one instant across several timezones), which is clear and distinct from siblings like time_now and time_convert. However, it doesn't explicitly name the sibling alternatives it differs from, leaving differentiation implicit.
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?
Provides no when-to-use guidance, no conditions that select this tool over time_convert, time_now, or time_list_timezones, and no exclusions. Usage is only loosely implied by 'across several timezones'.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.