Fetch The Economic Times top stories with titles, URLs, times, and some summaries. No parameters needed for current headlines.
Get The Economic Times top stories. Returns the current Economic Times top stories. Each item has its title, URL and publication time, plus a summary for some stories. Takes no parameters; use economictimes-headlines for a single section.
| 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?
With no annotations the description carries the full burden, and it does well: it discloses that the tool takes no parameters and describes the return payload shape (title, URL, publication time, summary for some stories). It omits anything about freshness/caching or rate limits, but for a public read-only news feed that is a minor 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?
Front-loaded and short, but the first two sentences say essentially the same thing ("Get ... top stories" / "Returns the current ... top stories"), which is a small waste. The remaining sentences (payload shape, sibling routing) each earn their place.
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 read tool with no output schema, the description covers everything needed: what it returns, its item structure, and when to prefer a sibling. Nothing an agent needs in order to call it correctly is missing.
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?
Zero parameters, so the baseline is 4 per the rubric. The description reinforces this with "Takes no parameters," which matches the empty schema and prevents an agent from hunting for a filter argument that does not exist.
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 The Economic Times top stories") and immediately distinguishes itself from its closest sibling by naming economictimes-headlines for single-section needs. An agent can separate this from economictimes_article/sections/author without opening a schema.
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?
Gives clear routing guidance: use this for the site-wide top stories, and use `economictimes-headlines` when a single section is wanted. It stops short of mapping itself against the other Economictimes siblings (article, author, sections), so the guidance is clear but not exhaustive.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.