Fetch Gizmodo top stories from the public feed; returns headline items from the general top-story stream. For a section-specific list, use gizmodo_headlines with a supported section slug. Use gizmodo_article with a returned article URL when you need one story's body.
| 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 the safety profile is covered. The description adds useful context beyond that: this reads from a public feed and returns headline items from the unfiltered general top-story stream, clarifying that no section filtering applies. It stops short of describing result volume or ordering, which keeps it below a 5.
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?
Three sentences, each earning its place: identification, the section-filter alternative, and the single-article alternative. The tool's own scope is front-loaded before the routing advice, so an agent gets the essential fact first.
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 explain return values, and with zero parameters and annotations covering the safety profile, nothing an agent needs in order to call this correctly is missing. The sibling-routing guidance completes the picture.
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 tool takes zero parameters, so the schema baseline of 4 applies. There are no parameter semantics for the description to clarify, and it correctly does not invent any.
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 (fetch), resource (Gizmodo top stories from the public feed) and scope (the general top-story stream). It explicitly distinguishes itself from gizmodo_headlines (section-specific) and gizmodo_article (single story body), so an agent can route correctly without opening any 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?
Names both alternatives with the exact condition that selects each: 'For a section-specific list, use gizmodo_headlines with a supported section slug' and 'Use gizmodo_article with a returned article URL when you need one story's body.' This is explicit when-to-use/when-not-to-use guidance rather than implied usage.
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.
