Underground Cultural District MCP Server

convert-timestamp

Convert timestamps between Unix epoch, ISO 8601, and human-readable date strings. Pass 'now' for current time.

Instructions

Convert between Unix epoch (seconds), ISO 8601, and human-readable date strings. Pass 'now' as value for current time.

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": {
      "value": "<value>"
    },
    "name": "convert-timestamp"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`value`	Yes	Timestamp value or 'now'
`from`	No		unix
`to`	No		human

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv4.1.0Apr 17, 2026

TDQS

B3.2/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It does not disclose behavioral traits such as whether it is a read-only operation, error handling, or precision of conversion. The mention of 'now' is useful but insufficient.

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, front-loaded with the primary action. No wasted words; efficient and to the point.

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?

The description is minimal for a 3-parameter tool with no output schema or annotations. It does not explain the return format, error cases, or default behavior (e.g., 'to' defaults to 'human'). The information is not sufficient to fully understand tool behavior.

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 description coverage is 33% (only the 'value' parameter described). The description adds context by listing conversion formats (unix, iso, human) and clarifying 'value' can be 'now'. However, it does not elaborate on 'from' and 'to' beyond enum values, leaving 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 tool converts between Unix epoch, ISO 8601, and human-readable date strings, and mentions the special 'now' value. This is specific and distinguishes it from other conversion tools like convert-eth-units.

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. It only mentions the special 'now' value but lacks context on prerequisites or exclusions.

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