Skip to main content
Glama

Crawlora MCP

vanityfair_sections

Read-only

Vanity Fair public editorial or RSS sections accepted by vanityfair_headlines.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "vanityfair_sections"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
dataYesThe tool result payload (shape varies per tool; see each tool's docs resource).

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A3.6/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, covering the safety profile. The description adds the useful qualifier that the list spans public editorial or RSS sections, but says nothing further about whether the set is static, dynamic, or region-dependent.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

A single, front-loaded sentence with no padding. It is slightly terse/telegraphic rather than a complete statement, but every word earns its place.

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?

For a zero-parameter enumerator with an output schema and annotations already covering safety, the description supplies the one thing needed: what the returned values are and who consumes them. Nothing critical is missing.

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

Parameters4/5

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

The tool takes no parameters, so there are no parameter semantics for the description to carry; the empty, closed schema is self-explanatory. Baseline of 4 applies.

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?

States the resource (Vanity Fair sections) and its scope (public editorial or RSS), and names the sibling that consumes the values (vanityfair_headlines). It distinguishes itself from vanityfair_article/news, though the phrasing 'sections accepted by' is slightly indirect.

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?

Mentioning that these are the sections 'accepted by vanityfair_headlines' implies the lookup-then-call workflow, but the description never explicitly says when to use this tool or that it should precede a headlines call. 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.

Try in Browser

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources