Retrieve current Daily Mail top stories from its public RSS feed. Returns clean JSON with headlines and summaries.
Get Daily Mail top stories. Returns fresh Daily Mail top stories from its public RSS feed.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.17.5Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations exist, so the description carries the burden of disclosing behavior. It usefully reveals that the source is a public RSS feed and that the content is refreshed, implying a read-only operation with no authentication. It does not describe the item shape, ordering, or quantity returned, but for a zero-parameter public feed that is a moderate gap.
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 short and front-loads the core action. The first sentence is largely restated by the second, but the second adds the useful public-RSS source detail, so the redundancy is minor.
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 parameterless feed tool, the description covers what it does, where data comes from, and that it is current. It is adequate, though it would be stronger if it noted how top stories differ from dailymail_headlines or what fields the returned stories contain.
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 has zero parameters, so there are no parameter semantics for the description to clarify. The description correctly implies a no-input call and the schema confirms it, earning the 0-parameter baseline.
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 clear verb (Get) and resource (Daily Mail top stories), and adds that it is fed from the public RSS feed. However, it does not contrast with sibling tools like dailymail_headlines, so it does not fully distinguish among the Daily Mail family.
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?
No guidance is given about when to choose this over dailymail_headlines, dailymail_article, or dailymail_author. The only situational clue is the phrase 'top stories,' which is implied rather than explicit. With a family of similarly named Daily Mail tools, this is a meaningful gap.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.