docs-search-mcp

convert_time

Read-onlyIdempotent

Convert a 24-hour HH:MM time between IANA timezones; include an optional date to make daylight-saving adjustments correct for that day.

Instructions

Convert a 24-hour HH:MM time between IANA timezones (e.g. Europe/Warsaw -> Asia/Dubai). Optional date (YYYY-MM-DD) makes daylight-saving correct for that day; default is today.

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": {
      "source_timezone": "<source_timezone>",
      "time": "<time>",
      "target_timezone": "<target_timezone>"
    },
    "name": "convert_time"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`date`	No
`time`	Yes
`source_timezone`	Yes
`target_timezone`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Oct 3, 2026

TDQS

A4.5/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already establish readOnly/idempotent/non-destructive, and the description adds genuine behavioral context: DST correctness depends on the supplied date, and the result is day-sensitive. It does not describe invalid-timezone error behavior or the exact returned format, which keeps it short of a 5.

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 core operation and followed by the one non-obvious qualifier (date/DST). No filler or repetition of the tool name.

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?

For a 4-parameter utility with no output schema and no schema-level descriptions, it supplies all input formats and behavior. The only omission is the shape of the returned value (e.g. converted HH:MM plus offset), which is implied but not stated.

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

Parameters5/5

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

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must carry the load and does: it gives the time format (HH:MM 24-hour), the date format (YYYY-MM-DD) and its default/effect, and shows IANA timezone syntax via the Europe/Warsaw -> Asia/Dubai example, covering source and target zones.

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?

States a specific verb (Convert), resource (a 24-hour HH:MM time), and a scoped transformation between named IANA timezones, with a concrete example. Unambiguous and trivially distinguishable from the note/URL siblings.

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?

Explains when the optional date matters (DST-correct conversion for that day) and what the default is (today), which is the only real usage decision for this tool. No explicit exclusions, but there is no competing alternative tool to route away from.

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

Deploy Server