Get the latest feed items (technology, compliance, and security news for AI agents), optionally filtered by tags and source.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| tags | No | Optional tag filters. | |
| limit | No | Maximum number of items to return. | |
| source | No | Optional source filter. |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| data | Yes | Matching feed items. | |
| source | Yes | Provenance of the payload. |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
Output schema / (root)Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+ "additionalProperties": false,
+ "properties": {
+ "data": {
+ "description": "Matching feed items.",
+ "items": {
+ "additionalProperties": false,
+ "properties": {
+ "id": {
+ "description": "Item id.",
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "score": {
+ "description": "Community ranking score.",
+ "type": "number"
+ },
+ "summary": {
+ "description": "Short summary, or null when the item has not been enriched yet.",
+ "type": [
+ "string",
+ "null"
+ ]
+ },
+ "tags": {
+ "description": "Classifier tags.",
+ "items": {
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "type": "array"
+ },
+ "title": {
+ "description": "Item title.",
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "url": {
+ "description": "Canonical item URL.",
+ "type": "string"
+ }
+ },
+ "required": [
+ "id",
+ "title",
+ "summary",
+ "tags",
+ "score",
+ "url"
+ ],
+ "type": "object"
+ },
+ "type": "array"
+ },
+ "source": {
+ "additionalProperties": false,
+ "description": "Provenance of the payload.",
+ "properties": {
+ "name": {
+ "description": "Feed name.",
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "url": {
+ "description": "Feed homepage URL.",
+ "type": "string"
+ }
+ },
+ "required": [
+ "name",
+ "url"
+ ],
+ "type": "object"
+ }
+ },
+ "required": [
+ "data",
+ "source"
+ ],
+ "type": "object"
+}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 domain context (technology, compliance, security news) but discloses no additional behavioral traits such as result ordering, pagination, or limitation on recency. Given the annotation coverage, this is adequate but not insightful.
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?
The description is a single, front-loaded sentence that communicates the core function and optional filters without any fluff. Every word contributes to clarity, and it avoids unnecessary details. This is an exemplar of conciseness.
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?
The presence of an output schema covers return structure, but the description omits crucial usage context relative to the sibling query_security_feed. It also does not explain what 'latest' means (time window, ordering) or that results may be non-exhaustive due to openWorldHint. While sufficient for a simple read tool, the missing sibling differentiation makes it incomplete for an agent deciding between 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?
The schema provides 100% description coverage for all three parameters, so the description need not compensate. The mention of 'filtered by tags and source' merely summarizes the schema without adding new meaning. This meets the baseline expectation for a schema-rich 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?
The description states a specific verb and resource ('get latest feed items') and mentions optional filters, making the core purpose clear. However, it does not differentiate from the sibling tool query_security_feed, so an agent might struggle to choose between them. It is unambiguous but lacks sibling distinction.
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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus query_security_feed or report_incident. It implies a read operation but does not state any conditions, exclusions, or preferred scenarios. Without context, an agent cannot determine the best tool for a given request.
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.