Fetch Engadget technology stories with titles, URLs, summaries, authors, publish times, and images. Use it to get current tech news without parameters.
Get Engadget top stories. Returns the current Engadget technology news. Each item has a title, URL, summary, publish time, author and image when available. Engadget articles are free to read. Takes no parameters; use engadget-headlines for a single category.
| 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 discloses the return fields (title, URL, summary, publish time, author, image) and that articles are free to read, which is useful. But it omits pagination, result count, caching/freshness, or rate-limit behavior for a news feed.
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?
Four short sentences, front-loaded with the core action, then return shape, then access note, then the sibling pointer. No filler and every sentence carries distinct information.
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?
With no output schema and no annotations, the description supplies the essential missing context: what is returned and that access is free. It is nearly complete for a trivial no-arg feed tool, only missing pagination/freshness detail.
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, and the description explicitly states 'Takes no parameters,' which matches the empty schema. Baseline for a 0-param tool is 4; nothing more needs documenting.
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+resource ('Get Engadget top stories') and immediately clarifies it returns current technology news. It attempts to differentiate from the sibling engadget_headlines by scoping this to top/current stories versus a single category, though the naming overlap between 'news' and 'headlines' still requires the reader to trust the description.
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?
Explicitly routes the agent to an alternative ('use engadget-headlines for a single category'), which gives a real selection criterion. Slightly undermined because the referenced tool name uses a hyphen while the actual sibling is engadget_headlines, which could send an agent looking for a nonexistent tool.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.