SiteCheck Web Intel

One Hacker News item by numeric id from the official HN

search_hackernews_items

Read-only

One Hacker News item by numeric id from the official HN API (Firebase, public, no key): type, title, author, time, score, comment count, link and plain text. Deleted or unknown ids return 404. Price: $0.002 in USDC per successful call, paid with x402 (Base, Solana or Arc); failed calls are not charged.

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": {
      "id": "<id>"
    },
    "name": "search_hackernews_items"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`id`	Yes	Numeric HN item id, e.g. 8863

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`by`	No
`id`	No
`url`	No
`text`	No
`time`	No
`type`	No
`hnUrl`	No
`score`	No
`title`	No
`source`	No
`comments`	No
`checkedAt`	No
`replyCount`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedOct 23, 2026

TDQS

A3.8/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuinely non-structured context: the listed response fields, the fact that deleted/unknown ids return 404, and the $0.002 USDC x402 payment with no charge on failure — a cost model an agent cannot get from the schema.

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 identity and source, then failure and pricing semantics. No filler, no repetition of the title, and every clause carries new information.

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?

With one parameter, an output schema, and read-only/open-world annotations, the description covers what an agent needs to call it: source, field set, 404 failure mode, and payment terms. The remaining gap is sibling routing versus search_hacker_news, which is not addressed.

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

Parameters3/5

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

Schema coverage is 100% and the single 'id' parameter is already documented with an example (8863). The description adds only a mild reinforcement ('numeric id') which clarifies that a non-numeric HN slug is invalid — baseline 3 is appropriate when the schema carries the load.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description states a specific resource ('One Hacker News item') and access path ('by numeric id from the official HN API (Firebase, public, no key)'), which lets an agent distinguish a single-item fetch from a search. It stops short of naming the sibling search_hacker_news, so the differentiation is inferred from 'by numeric id' rather than stated.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Usage context is implied: this is the retrieval path once you already hold a numeric id, and the sibling search_hacker_news is presumably how you get one. There is no explicit when-to-use/when-not-to-use statement or named alternative, leaving routing to inference.

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

All SiteCheck Web Intel tools Inspect

Try in Browser

One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources

Need Help?