Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
API Hub MCP — 337+ Tools

API Hub MCP — 337+ Tools

by scotia1973-bot
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Remote

convert_timestamp

Convert Unix timestamps to human-readable dates or date strings back to Unix timestamps. Supports formats like ISO 8601, RFC 2822, and custom outputs.

Instructions

Convert a timestamp between Unix epoch and human-readable date formats.

Use this to translate Unix timestamps (e.g., 1717000000) into ISO 8601
date strings, or convert date strings back to Unix timestamps.

Parameters:
    value  — The timestamp or date string to convert (required).
             Accepts Unix timestamps (seconds since epoch) or various
             date string formats like "2025-05-29" or "May 29, 2025".
    format — Target output format (default: "iso"). Common values include
             "iso", "unix", "rfc2822", etc.

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

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
valueYes
formatNoiso

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv2.4.1

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

No annotations, so description carries burden. Describes input formats and output format options but lacks details on error handling, timezone, or invalid input behavior.

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 short paragraphs, front-loaded with purpose, then parameter details. No filler.

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?

Simple tool; description covers key usage. Missing description of return format (likely depends on format param) but output schema may provide it.

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?

Schema coverage 0%, so description compensates with concrete examples of acceptable formats for 'value' and common values for 'format'. Adds meaning beyond schema.

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?

Clearly states it converts between Unix epoch and human-readable date formats. Distinct from sibling conversion tools.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Explicitly says when to use: translate Unix timestamps to ISO 8601 or date strings back to Unix timestamps. No negative cases but clear.

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