List all GB News sections and topics accepted by the headlines tool, including slugs, names, and feed URLs, to choose valid categories for requests.
Get GB News sections. Lists the 390 GB News sections and topics accepted by gbnews-headlines. Each entry has a slug that is the path on the site, such as news/uk/scotland or news/world/china, a display name and the feed url. Takes no parameters.
| 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?
With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and mostly succeeds: it states the tool takes no parameters (no side effects possible), fixes the result size (390), and describes the shape of each entry. It does not discuss caching, pagination (unlikely given a fixed list), or freshness, which keeps it short of a 5.
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 sentences, front-loaded with purpose, then the relationship to the consuming tool, then the return shape with concrete slug examples. No filler or repetition.
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 parameterless enumeration tool with no output schema, the description supplies everything an agent needs: what it lists, why (feeding gbnews-headlines), the count, and the fields of each entry including a real example slug.
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, so baseline is 4. The description explicitly confirms 'Takes no parameters', which is consistent with the empty schema and prevents an agent from hunting for a filter argument.
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?
Specific verb + resource ('Get GB News sections') followed by precise scope: the 390 sections/topics accepted by gbnews-headlines. It distinguishes itself from the sibling gbnews_headlines by making clear it is an enumeration/lookup index rather than a content fetch, and names the exact entry fields returned.
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 'accepted by `gbnews-headlines`' strongly implies the workflow: call this to discover valid slugs before fetching headlines. There is no explicit when-not rule or a second alternative named, but the intended use is unambiguous from context.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.