Fetch current top stories from The Express Tribune's public RSS feed. Returns feed dates and publisher teasers as published.
Get The Express Tribune top stories. Returns current top stories from The Express Tribune's public RSS feed. Feed dates and publisher teasers are returned as published.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.17.9Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries the disclosure burden and does add useful context: the data source is a public RSS feed and dates/teasers are returned as published (i.e., unprocessed). It does not mention freshness, caching, rate limits, or ordering, which are relevant for a feed-backed news tool.
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?
Two compact sentences with the core action front-loaded and no filler. Slightly redundant in restating 'top stories' twice but overall efficient.
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-param read tool with no output schema, the description is adequate but leaves gaps: it never explains how 'news' differs from the sibling 'headlines' endpoint, which is the main decision an agent must make in this cluster.
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 takes zero parameters, so there is nothing to document and the baseline of 4 applies. The description adds no parameter meaning, which is acceptable given the empty 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 top stories'), so the retrieval action is unambiguous. However, it does not differentiate itself from the sibling expresstribune_headlines, which by naming convention appears to serve the same top-stories purpose.
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?
No guidance on when to prefer this over expresstribune_headlines, expresstribune_article, or expresstribune_sections. The agent is left to infer the distinction from the tool name alone.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.