Retrieve Fox News top stories from a public RSS feed to get current headlines and article bodies without credentials.
Get Fox News top stories. Returns fresh Fox News top stories from the public site-wide RSS feed. The feed is a public headline/body source and does not require credentials.
| 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 usefully discloses that the feed is public, requires no credentials, and 'Get' implies a read-only operation. However, it does not mention rate limits, failure behavior, or output format, which would be valuable for a tool with no output schema.
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 short sentences with the core action front-loaded. There is minor redundancy between 'Get Fox News top stories' and 'Returns fresh Fox News top stories,' but the description remains efficient and readable.
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 read-only feed tool, the description covers source, freshness, and authentication needs. It does not describe the exact return structure, but the phrase 'headline/body source' hints at content. Given the tool's simplicity, this is largely sufficient.
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 an empty schema with 100% coverage. The description reinforces this by noting it is a 'site-wide' feed, implying no filters. Per the baseline for zero-parameter tools, a 4 is appropriate.
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 Fox News top stories.' The source is specified as 'public site-wide RSS feed,' which differentiates it from article-specific and search siblings. However, it does not explicitly distinguish from foxnews_headlines, which likely overlaps in scope.
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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like foxnews_headlines, foxnews_sections, or foxnews_search. The description implies it is for top stories but gives no conditions, exclusions, or comparisons. With many sibling news tools, an agent cannot confidently decide between foxnews_news and foxnews_headlines.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.