ZapifyAPI MCP Server

convert_timezone

Convert time between timezones. Input an ISO time, source timezone, and target timezone to get the converted result.

Instructions

Convert time between timezones.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "from_tz": "<from_tz>",
      "to_tz": "<to_tz>"
    },
    "name": "convert_timezone"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`time`	No	ISO time string
`to_tz`	Yes
`from_tz`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.0.0Aug 3, 2026

TDQS

C2.9/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It only states the basic purpose and does not explain the optional 'time' parameter's default behavior, timezone format expectations, error handling, or return value.

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, clear sentence with no redundancy, front-loading the purpose efficiently. While it is brief, it is not empty or tautological; however, the extreme brevity may under-serve a tool with three parameters and no annotations.

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?

For a tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description should compensate by explaining the return value, optional parameter behavior, and timezone formatting. It does none of these, leaving important gaps for reliable usage.

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

Parameters2/5

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

Schema description coverage is only 33% (only 'time' has a description). The description adds no meaning for 'from_tz' or 'to_tz', nor does it clarify the optional 'time' parameter or its default value, leaving significant semantic gaps.

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 action (convert) and the resource (time) with the scope (between timezones). This uniquely identifies the tool among siblings like convert_currency and convert_units, satisfying the 'specific verb+resource' criterion.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, no exclusions, and no mention of specific use cases or prerequisites. The only context is the name and sibling tools, which is implicit rather than explicit.

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