Date-time Tools MCP

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions that it retrieves the user's current date/time/timezone, which implies a read-only operation, but doesn't specify whether this requires authentication, how frequently it can be called, or what format the data is returned in. This leaves significant gaps for a tool with no annotation coverage.

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, efficient sentence that directly states the tool's function without any unnecessary words. It's front-loaded with the core purpose and wastes no space, making it ideal for quick comprehension.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity (0 parameters, no output schema, no annotations), the description is adequate but not fully complete. It explains what the tool does but lacks details on return format, authentication needs, or error handling. For a basic tool, this is minimally viable but leaves room for improvement in behavioral context.

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 input schema has 0 parameters with 100% description coverage, so the schema fully documents the lack of inputs. The description doesn't need to add parameter details, and it appropriately doesn't mention any parameters, earning a high baseline score for this context.

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's purpose with a specific verb ('Gets') and resource ('current date, time and timezone of the user'), making it immediately understandable. However, it doesn't explicitly distinguish itself from sibling tools like 'convertTimezones' or 'mutateDate', which prevents a perfect score.

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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'convertTimezones' (for timezone conversion) or 'mutateDate' (for date manipulation). It states what the tool does but offers no context about appropriate use cases or exclusions.

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