Retrieve verified GhanaWeb article sections that ghanaweb-headlines accepts, filtering out static, media, and non-article destinations.
Get GhanaWeb article sections. Returns the complete verified article-bearing section set accepted by ghanaweb-headlines. Static, media, and non-article destinations are excluded.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.17.7Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries more burden. It discloses that the result is a 'complete verified article-bearing section set' and excludes static/media/non-article destinations, which is useful behavioral context. But it doesn't mention return format, whether results are cached/static, or any auth/rate limits. Adequate but incomplete.
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 tight sentences, front-loaded with the tool's purpose and then the scope exclusion. No filler or redundancy.
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?
Given no parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is nearly sufficient: it explains what the tool does and what the result set contains. It could improve by specifying the output format (e.g., list of section identifiers) or referencing sibling tools for context, but it covers the essentials.
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, so baseline is 4. Schema coverage is 100% trivially. The description correctly does not discuss parameters, which 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 and resource: 'Get GhanaWeb article sections.' This is clear and distinguishable from sibling tools like ghanaweb_headlines, ghanaweb_news, ghanaweb_video_sections, etc., though the description doesn't explicitly reference those siblings. The second sentence helps define the scope of returned sections.
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 description hints at workflow use by noting the sections are 'accepted by ghanaweb-headlines' and that non-article destinations are excluded. However, it doesn't explicitly say when to call this vs. ghanaweb_headlines or other GhanaWeb tools; usage is only implied.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.