Retrieve current BBC News headlines from any section, including world, UK, politics, business, technology, and more. Defaults to world headlines if no section is specified.
Get BBC News section headlines. Returns fresh headlines from a public BBC News RSS section. section defaults to world.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| section | No | BBC News RSS section, defaults to world |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.17.5Input schema / properties / section / enumAdded value: +[
+ "all",
+ "world",
+ "uk",
+ "politics",
+ "business",
+ "health",
+ "science_and_environment",
+ "technology",
+ "entertainment_and_arts"
+]v1.16.2Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries the burden. It discloses that the data is public (no auth) and 'fresh' (live feed), which is useful. However, it does not describe the response format, potential errors, or any limits. For a simple headline fetcher, this is adequate but not rich.
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?
The description is two concise sentences with no filler. The primary action and source are stated first, followed by the default. It earns its place with no redundancy.
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 single-parameter tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description is sufficient. It explains what it returns (headlines), the source (public BBC RSS), and the default. It could mention that the section must be one of the enum values, but that is captured in the schema. Overall, an agent has enough to call it 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 coverage is 100% for the section parameter, which already describes its purpose and default. The tool description adds minimal value by restating the default. Since the schema handles the semantics, the baseline of 3 is appropriate.
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 clearly states the verb 'Get', the resource 'BBC News section headlines', and specifies it comes from a public RSS section. It also notes the default section, making it unambiguous and distinct from sibling headline tools for other news sources.
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 context is clear: this tool is for BBC News headlines. It implies when to use it, but does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusion criteria. Since there are many headline tools, a note about using this for BBC specifically would be helpful, but it's not required given the name and description.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.