list_digestsNewest-first list of every published energypod.io edition (weekly energy-industry digests): slug (YYYY-MM-DD), week label, and episode count. Call this FIRST — the first entry is the latest week, and its slug feeds get_digest / list_digest_episodes.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| digests | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
Output schema / (root)Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+ "additionalProperties": false,
+ "properties": {
+ "digests": {
+ "items": {
+ "additionalProperties": false,
+ "properties": {
+ "as_of": {
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "episode_count": {
+ "type": "integer"
+ },
+ "slug": {
+ "description": "YYYY-MM-DD edition date",
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "url": {
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "week_label": {
+ "type": "string"
+ }
+ },
+ "required": [
+ "slug",
+ "week_label",
+ "as_of",
+ "episode_count",
+ "url"
+ ],
+ "type": "object"
+ },
+ "type": "array"
+ }
+ },
+ "required": [
+ "digests"
+ ],
+ "type": "object"
+}Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and idempotentHint. The description adds behavioral context beyond annotations: newest-first ordering, slug format (YYYY-MM-DD), and scope limited to published editions. 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?
Two tight sentences: the first defines scope and output fields, the second gives ordering and chaining instruction. No filler or redundancy; every clause earns its place.
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 no-parameter list tool with an output schema, the description is complete: it covers sort order, output fields, and next-step tool routing. Nothing an agent needs to invoke it correctly is missing.
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?
The tool has zero parameters, so schema coverage is trivially 100%. Description appropriately focuses on output semantics rather than params, meeting the baseline for a 0-parameter tool.
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?
Description uses a specific verb ('list') and resource ('every published energypod.io edition'), enumerates the exact output fields (slug, week label, episode count), and names the downstream sibling tools it feeds. This clearly distinguishes it from get_digest, get_episode, list_digest_episodes, and search.
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 instructs 'Call this FIRST' and explains that the first entry's slug feeds get_digest / list_digest_episodes, giving clear entry-point context. It doesn't explicitly state when-not-to-use vs search, but the intended usage is unambiguous.
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.