Retrieve current Houston Chronicle homepage top stories as structured JSON, preserving publisher premium markers for each article.
Get Houston Chronicle top stories. Returns current public Houston Chronicle homepage stories. Publisher premium markers are preserved on article responses.
| 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 full behavioral burden. It does disclose useful scope context ('current public homepage stories') and that 'publisher premium markers are preserved on article responses', but omits auth requirements, rate limits, pagination, and return shape for a no-param feed endpoint.
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, front-loaded sentences with no filler. The second sentence partially restates the first ('top stories' vs 'homepage stories'), which is minor redundancy but it does add the 'public' qualifier.
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, no-annotation, no-output-schema feed tool, the description covers what is fetched and a notable output detail (premium markers). It is largely complete, though return format and ordering are left implicit.
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 the baseline is 4. There are no parameter semantics to explain and the description correctly implies the tool is called without input.
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 clear verb+resource ('Get Houston Chronicle top stories') and clarifies the scope as 'current public Houston Chronicle homepage stories'. It does not, however, distinguish itself from the sibling houston_chronicle_headlines or houston_chronicle_article, so the agent cannot route confidently between them from this text alone.
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?
There is no explicit when-to-use guidance, no conditions for choosing this over houston_chronicle_headlines or houston_chronicle_article, and no prerequisites. Usage is only implied by the word 'top stories'.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.