list_timely_news'지금 볼만한 뉴스', '지금 읽을 만한 뉴스 추천', '뭐 볼 만한 거 없어?', '출근길/점심/퇴근길에 볼 뉴스'처럼 지금 시간대에 맞춰 골라주는 추천 뉴스를 물을 때 사용합니다. 홈페이지의 시간대별 큐레이션을 반환합니다.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| page | No | 페이징 메타데이터(있을 때). | |
| items | No | 기사 카드 목록. |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, indicating safe read behavior. The description adds that it returns homepage time-based curation, which is consistent but not significantly new information.
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 concise sentences in Korean front-load the purpose and provide example queries. No redundant information.
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?
Given no parameters, clear annotations, and existence of an output schema, the description fully covers when and what the tool does for its intended use case.
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?
No parameters exist, and schema coverage is 100%. The baseline for zero parameters is 4; the description does not need to add parameter details.
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?
The description clearly states the tool returns time-based curated news, with specific example queries. It distinguishes from sibling news list tools by focusing on current time relevance.
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?
The description provides clear context for when to use (time-specific news queries) but does not explicitly exclude other scenarios or name alternatives, though it is implied by the examples given.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Each tool targets a distinct purpose: horoscopes (daily vs MBTI), news listings (latest, most read, popular, recommended, timely, top headlines), sections, and search. Descriptions provide clear usage examples and explicitly differentiate similar-sounding tools like list_most_read_news (editor-curated) vs list_popular_news (view-count based).
All tool names follow a consistent verb_noun pattern in snake_case: get_ for horoscopes, list_ for various news lists and sections, and search_ for search. No mixing of camelCase or other conventions.
10 tools is appropriate for a news server. It covers the main news consumption patterns (latest, popular, recommended, by section, search) plus two specialized horoscope tools. Neither too sparse nor overwhelming.
The tool surface covers typical news site operations: browsing latest, popular (both view-based and editor-curated), by category, headlines, time-based recommendations, and search. Horoscope retrieval is an extra feature. The missing article text retrieval is intentional (metadata-only return). No obvious gaps for the intended domain.