Retrieve public Daily Wire article metadata and body paragraphs from an article URL, covering any content-vertical prefix.
Get Daily Wire article content. Returns public Daily Wire article metadata and body paragraphs from an article URL under any of the site's content-vertical prefixes.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| url | Yes | Daily Wire article URL |
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 full burden. It discloses that the tool returns public data (metadata and body paragraphs) and works for content-vertical prefixes, which adds useful context. However, it does not mention what happens on invalid URLs, whether it requires authentication, or any rate limits. The tool is likely read-only, but that is implicit, not explicit.
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?
A single sentence that is entirely front-loaded with the purpose and key constraints. No wasted words; concise and to the point.
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, the description provides a reasonable overview but lacks details on the return structure. It mentions 'metadata and body paragraphs' but does not enumerate fields like title, author, or publication date, which could help an agent consume the result. Given the simplicity, it's adequate but not comprehensive.
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% (one param 'url' with a concise description). The description adds a minor constraint about content-vertical prefixes, but does not elaborate on URL format beyond what the schema already provides. Baseline of 3 is appropriate since the schema does most of the work.
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 specific verb and resource: 'Get Daily Wire article content' and specifies return type (metadata and body paragraphs) and input (article URL). However, it does not explicitly distinguish itself from sibling article tools like dailywire_news or dailywire_headlines, which could be confused for similar purpose.
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 on when to use this tool versus other Daily Wire tools (e.g., dailywire_news, dailywire_headlines) or other article-fetching tools. The description only mentions it works for any content-vertical prefix, which is a URL constraint, not usage guidance.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.