Fetch Economic Times top story headlines and metadata from the public RSS feed, providing structured news data for business and market analysis.
Get The Economic Times top stories. Returns fresh Economic Times top-stories headline metadata 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 are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It mentions it's from a public RSS feed, implying no authentication needed, but doesn't describe the exact return format, pagination, or potential rate limits. This is acceptable for a simple read operation, but more transparency about data recency and format would help.
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 sentences, about 20 words, with no fluff. It front-loads the purpose and mentions the source, earning its place. No unnecessary details.
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 zero-parameter headline retrieval tool, the description is complete enough: it states the source (RSS feed), the content (top-stories headline metadata), and freshness. Minor gaps like exact output structure are not critical for invocation.
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, and the schema is empty. The description correctly implies that no input is needed, so parameter semantics are fully covered. The agent knows no arguments are required, making this dimension trivially satisfactory.
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 tool fetches Economic Times top stories headline metadata from a public RSS feed. It specifies the verb 'Get', the resource ('top stories'), and the source (RSS feed), making it distinct from other news tools like nyt_headlines or apnews_headlines.
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 for retrieving fresh top stories without parameters, but doesn't explicitly say when not to use it versus alternatives. However, it's self-contained as a simple headline fetcher, so usage context is clear enough for an agent.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.