Fetch fresh headlines from one Android Authority section page by providing a section slug, returning clean article titles for news, reviews, deals, and more.
Get Android Authority section headlines. Returns fresh headlines from one public Android Authority section page.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| section | Yes | Android Authority section slug |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.17.5Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations provided, the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It discloses that results are 'fresh', that the source is 'public', and that the scope is a single section page — useful traits. However, it does not mention how many headlines are returned, what fields accompany each headline, or whether any rate limiting or pagination applies.
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 with no filler. The core action is front-loaded, and the additional details ('fresh', 'public', 'one ... section page') are terse and relevant.
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 headline-fetching tool, the description covers what it returns, the source scope, and freshness. With no output schema, a brief note on the exact response shape (e.g., array of headline strings) would make it fully complete, but this is a minor gap given the tool's simplicity.
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 schema already documents the single parameter with 100% coverage ('Android Authority section slug') and provides a complete enum of valid slugs. The description adds little beyond connecting 'section' to the section-page concept, so it does not meaningfully compensate for anything the schema lacks.
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 ('Android Authority section headlines'), and clarifies scope ('from one public Android Authority section page'). It is clearly distinct from the dozens of other publishers' headline tools, though it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like androidauthority_news or androidauthority_sections.
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?
There is no guidance about when to use this tool versus alternatives such as androidauthority_news or androidauthority_article. The phrase 'from one ... section page' implies the section parameter is the key input, but no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use conditions are given.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.