Fetch headlines from any Express Tribune section via its public RSS feed, including historical or infrequently updated posts with original timestamps.
Get The Express Tribune section headlines. Returns headlines from one public RSS section. Some directory feeds are historical or infrequently updated; their publisher timestamps are preserved.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| section | Yes | The Express Tribune section slug |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.17.9Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations provided, the description carries the whole burden and does add real behavioral context: one section per call, feeds sourced from public RSS, and a staleness warning that some directory feeds are historical or infrequently updated with publisher timestamps preserved. It still omits return shape and volume, but the freshness caveat is genuinely useful.
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?
Three tight sentences, front-loaded with the core action, then scope, then the caveat. Every sentence earns its place with no filler.
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-param, no-output-schema tool, the description covers purpose, scope, source, and a freshness caveat. It is nearly complete, though it does not describe the fields or count of returned headlines.
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 parameter is a full enum of valid slugs, so the schema does the heavy lifting. The description only restates 'section' generically and adds no syntax or format detail beyond the schema.
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 (Get) and resource (The Express Tribune section headlines), and clarifies scope as 'one public RSS section'. It does not explicitly name sibling tools like expresstribune_news or expresstribune_sections, so sibling differentiation relies on inference.
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 phrase 'Returns headlines from one public RSS section' implies the one-section-at-a-time usage pattern, but there is no explicit when-to-use or when-to-prefer-an-alternative guidance relative to the sibling news/sections/author tools.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.