Every South China Morning Post section accepted by scmp_headlines, with its slug, display name, feed URL, and parent section (when it is a subsection).
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| data | Yes | The tool result payload (shape varies per tool; see each tool's docs resource). |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so safety is covered. The description adds useful content shape (slug, name, feed URL, parent section) and that it is the authoritative set accepted by scmp_headlines, but nothing about ordering, completeness guarantees, or freshness.
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?
A single front-loaded sentence that names the resource first and the payload second, with zero waste. Slightly dense but appropriate for a no-arg discovery tool.
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?
With an output schema present, the description needn't detail return values, and it already sketches them. For a parameterless lookup, this is essentially complete; only the intended workflow with scmp_headlines could be made more explicit.
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?
Zero parameters, so there is nothing to document and the baseline is 4. The description appropriately uses the space to describe the returned fields instead.
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?
States a specific resource (SCMP sections) and enumerates exactly what each entry contains (slug, display name, feed URL, parent section). It ties itself to scmp_headlines, which helps position it relative to the news family, though it doesn't fully separate itself from other scmp_* siblings.
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 phrase 'accepted by scmp_headlines' implies this is the lookup for valid section slugs feeding another tool, but there's no explicit 'use this before/with X' or exclusion guidance. Usage is inferable rather than stated.
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.
