Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Crawlora MCP

Crawlora MCP

Official
by Crawlora-org
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Remote

arstechnica_headlines

Fetch recent Ars Technica headlines for a chosen section, returning each article's title and URL with optional summary, author, and publication details.

Instructions

Get Ars Technica section headlines. Returns recent Ars Technica headlines for one section. section is required and takes ai, apple, cars, culture, features, gadgets, gaming, health, information-technology, reviews, science, security, space, staff or tech-policy. Each item has a title and URL, and may also carry a summary, author, publication time and image.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
sectionYesArs Technica section slug

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Addedv1.17.5

TDQS

A3.5/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It usefully discloses the return shape (title, URL, optional summary, author, publication time, image), which partially compensates for the absent output schema, but says nothing about freshness, pagination, or whether results are cached or rate-limited.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with purpose and return contents, with no filler. The long inline enum list is somewhat redundant against the schema but still readable and arguably useful for quick scanning.

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 single-parameter read tool with no output schema, the description covers the essential elements: what it fetches, the required input, valid values, and the fields returned. Missing only marginal detail like result count or pagination behavior.

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

Parameters3/5

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

Schema description coverage is 100% and the single parameter is an enum, so the schema already fully specifies valid values. The description restates the same value list, which is redundant rather than additive. Baseline 3 is appropriate when the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 a specific verb and resource ('Get Ars Technica section headlines') and constrains scope ('for one section'), so an agent knows exactly what it returns. It does not, however, explicitly differentiate itself from close siblings like arstechnica_news, arstechnica_article, or arstechnica_sections, which prevents a 5.

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?

Usage is implied: 'one section' and the required `section` argument tell the agent this is a per-section listing call. There is no explicit guidance on when to use this versus arstechnica_news or arstechnica_article, and no exclusions or prerequisites are stated.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

Deploy Server

Other Tools