Returns a bounded snapshot of Cricinfo's latest public stories, including titles, summaries, authors, genres, publication times, images, and associated match or series identifiers. Use cricinfo_rss to read a Cricinfo RSS feed.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| limit | No | Maximum stories returned, from 1 to 100 |
| 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.
Input schema / properties / limit / descriptionAdded value: +"Maximum stories returned, from 1 to 100"Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so safety and external-reach are covered. The description adds the 'bounded snapshot' notion, hinting at a capped result set, but says nothing about freshness, caching, or pagination beyond that.
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 sentences, zero filler, with the core behavior (what is returned) front-loaded and the sibling pointer last. 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?
An output schema exists, so enumerating returned fields is partly redundant, but the tool otherwise gives enough for correct invocation: purpose, scope, and the alternative. Minor gap is the absence of any freshness/when-to-use framing.
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?
Schema description coverage is 100% for the single 'limit' parameter (1-100), so the schema carries the semantics. The phrase 'bounded snapshot' loosely reinforces that result size is capped, but adds no format or default detail beyond the schema.
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 verb ('Returns') and resource ('Cricinfo's latest public stories') and enumerates the payload (titles, summaries, authors, genres, times, images, match/series ids). It also names the sibling it is not, cricinfo_rss, so an agent can differentiate without opening a schema.
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?
It points to cricinfo_rss as the alternative for RSS reading, which is useful routing, but it never states when this tool should be chosen over that one, nor any exclusions or prerequisites. Usage is implied rather than spelled out.
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.