Fetch public Dawn article metadata and body paragraphs from a canonical URL, returning clean structured content for analysis.
Get Dawn article content. Returns public Dawn article metadata and body paragraphs from a canonical article URL.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| url | Yes | Canonical Dawn 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, the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It states the tool 'Returns public Dawn article metadata and body paragraphs,' which implies a read-only operation on publicly accessible content and indicates no authentication requirement. It does not cover error behavior or rate limits, but for a simple read tool this is reasonably transparent.
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 short sentences with no filler. The main action and return value are front-loaded, and every word contributes to understanding the tool's purpose.
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 single-parameter fetch tool with no output schema, the description adequately explains what is returned: metadata and body paragraphs. It could be more specific about what metadata fields are included or how errors are handled, but the essential information for invoking the tool correctly is present.
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 description coverage is 100%, and the single 'url' parameter is already described as 'Canonical Dawn article URL.' The description repeats 'canonical article URL' but adds no extra meaning beyond the schema, so the baseline score 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 uses a specific verb and resource: 'Get Dawn article content,' and further specifies the return payload as 'metadata and body paragraphs.' This clearly differentiates it from sibling tools like dawn_headlines, dawn_news, dawn_sections, and dawn_author, which serve different purposes.
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 description implies use when full article content is needed from a canonical URL, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention exclusions or name sibling tools such as dawn_headlines or dawn_news as alternatives for lighter-weight content.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.