Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Unraid MCP

Unraid MCP

by lemanjo
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Hybrid

Unraid API timeZoneOptions

unraid_v4371_query_time_zone_options
Read-onlyIdempotent

Lists all selectable system timezones for an Unraid server. Use this to view valid timezone options before updating the system time zone.

Instructions

List selectable system timezones.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "unraid_v4371_query_time_zone_options"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.0.1

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, covering the safety profile. The description adds the 'selectable' nuance, indicating these are valid configuration options, but does not disclose additional behavioral details such as list ordering, formatting, or whether the result is a plain list or objects. For a trivial no-parameter query, this is adequate but not enriched.

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, tight sentence with no wasted words. It is front-loaded with the verb and resource, and every word adds meaning.

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?

Given the tool's extreme simplicity (no parameters, no output schema, clear read-only annotations), the description sufficiently conveys what the tool returns: a list of selectable system timezones. It doesn't specify the exact data shape, but for invocation purposes it is complete enough.

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

Parameters4/5

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

There are zero parameters, and the schema covers this fully (100%). The baseline for a zero-parameter tool is 4. The description doesn't need to explain any parameters since none exist.

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 states a specific verb ('List') and resource ('selectable system timezones'), making the operation unambiguous. It clearly distinguishes this from other sibling query tools like query_system_time or query_settings, which deal with different data.

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 use case: retrieve available timezone options for a system setting. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it provide any exclusions or conditions. The context is clear but left to inference.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools