get_vertical_briefingFetch a stitched audio briefing of the top-25 trending articles in a single vertical from the last 24h. Premium — settles in USDC on Base via x402. Vertical must be one of the canonical 7 buckets: tech, finance, news, science, health, young_moms, yoga. First call without an X-Payment header returns the x402 challenge; sign + retry.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| vertical | Yes |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive. Description adds critical behavioral context: payment mechanism, time window (24h), and need for X-Payment header. No contradiction with annotations.
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?
Three sentences: first states purpose, second states premium nature, third explains payment flow. Front-loaded, no wasted words.
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?
Covers purpose, parameters, and payment flow thoroughly. Missing explicit description of the response structure after payment (e.g., URL to audio), but the intent is clear given the tool's name and sibling tools.
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?
Only parameter 'vertical' has an enum of 7 values explicitly listed in the description, fully compensating for 0% schema description coverage. Enum values named clearly.
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?
Clearly specifies verb (Fetch), resource (audio briefing), scope (top-25 articles, last 24h, single vertical). Distinguishes from siblings like get_vertical_landscape and stream_briefing_render_events.
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?
Explicitly explains the premium x402 payment flow with two-step process (challenge then signed retry). Restricts verticals to 7 canonical buckets. Provides clear actionable steps.
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.
Most tools have distinct purposes, but there is overlap between `get_my_private_feed`, `subscribe_topic`, and `list_subscriptions`—all return or manage feed URLs, which could confuse an agent. Otherwise, categories like publisher, fund manager, and search tools are clearly separated.
All tools use consistent snake_case with a verb_noun pattern (e.g., `get_article`, `search_articles`, `publisher_upload_audio`). Exceptions like `digest` are single-word verbs but still fit the pattern. No mixed conventions are present.
With 37 tools, the server exceeds the 25-tool threshold considered 'too many' by the rubric. While the broad scope (news, podcasting, publishing, fund management, embedding) justifies a large surface, the count still adds cognitive load and would benefit from splitting into separate servers.
The tool set covers the major domains: search, retrieval, subscriptions, publishing, fund manager operations, and embedder network. Minor gaps exist, such as the absence of an unsubscribe or delete-episode tool, but the core workflows are well-supported and agents can accomplish most tasks.