Get headlines from any ABC News Australia section by specifying its slug, returning clean public news data.
Get ABC News Australia section headlines. Returns fresh headlines from one public ABC News Australia section.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| section | Yes | ABC News Australia section slug |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.17.5Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It discloses that the tool returns fresh headlines and that the section is public, which is useful. However, it does not describe the output structure (e.g., array of headline strings vs. objects with URLs/timestamps) or any rate limits or pagination behavior.
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 concise sentences with no filler. The primary action is front-loaded, and the second sentence adds a useful scoping detail. Every word 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?
For a simple one-parameter tool with no output schema, the description is mostly adequate. It explains what is returned ('fresh headlines') and the scope, but it does not specify the return format, which an agent would need to know to consume the result correctly.
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% with a clear enum and description ('ABC News Australia section slug'). The description's mention of 'one public ABC News Australia section' reinforces the parameter's role but adds no additional semantic 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?
The description states a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('ABC News Australia section headlines'), and clarifies the scope ('from one public ABC News Australia section'). It is clear and unambiguous, though it does not explicitly name sibling tools like abcau_sections or abcau_article to differentiate them.
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 implies usage: call this when you want headlines for a specific ABC News Australia section. It gives context about freshness and public availability, but does not explicitly state when to use an alternative (e.g., abcau_sections to list sections, abcau_article for full articles) or provide exclusions.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.