Set the track-local hour and optional date in offline Assetto Corsa sessions, with optional time freeze by zeroing the time multiplier.
Set track-local time and (optionally) date via ac.setWeatherExactUTC0Timestamp (offline only). day/month/year 0 = keep the current date. freeze=True sets the time multiplier to 0.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| day | No | ||
| hour | Yes | ||
| year | No | ||
| month | No | ||
| freeze | No | ||
| minute | No |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It usefully discloses that the tool is offline-only, that it operates via ac.setWeatherExactUTC0Timestamp, and that freeze=True zeroes the time multiplier. It does not say what happens online, whether the change is reversible, or what a failure looks like.
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?
Two sentences, front-loaded with the core action, followed by parameter notes. Little waste, though the parenthetical 'via ac.setWeatherExactUTC0Timestamp' is implementation detail an agent doesn't need.
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?
For a 6-parameter mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description covers the key sentinels and the offline constraint but omits hour/minute semantics, valid ranges, and any statement of what the tool returns or how errors surface.
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?
Schema coverage is 0% across 6 parameters, so the description must compensate. It explains the '0 = keep current date' sentinel for day/month/year and the freeze default behavior, which is genuinely valuable. But hour/minute have no stated format, unit, or range (24-hour? 0-59?), leaving the only required parameter under-specified.
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?
States a specific verb and resource: 'Set track-local time and (optionally) date'. That is clear and distinct from the sibling tools (cameras, teleport, materials). It doesn't name a sibling to contrast with, so it stops short of 5.
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?
'offline only' is a real gating condition that tells the agent when this will work. Beyond that there's no guidance on when to prefer this over other state-manipulation tools, no prerequisites, and no exclusions.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.