Fetch IGN gaming and entertainment headlines from the public RSS feed to access current news in clean JSON.
Get IGN top stories. Returns fresh IGN top stories (gaming and entertainment news) from the public RSS feed.
| 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 provided, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It adds useful context by stating the source is a public RSS feed and that stories are 'fresh', implying no authentication and recent content. However, it does not disclose the output shape, how many stories are returned, or whether full article content is included.
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?
The description is two short sentences with no wasted words. The core action is front-loaded in the first sentence, and the second sentence adds relevant detail about content type and source.
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 tool that simply fetches top stories, the description is largely complete: it states the source, content domain, and freshness. The only gap is that no output schema exists and the description does not describe the structure of the returned items, but an agent can likely call and interpret this simple feed tool correctly.
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 input schema is empty with zero parameters, so parameter semantics are not a concern. The description appropriately has nothing to add about parameters; the baseline score of 4 applies.
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?
The description states a specific verb and resource: 'Get IGN top stories', and adds useful detail that they are gaming/entertainment news from a public RSS feed. However, it does not differentiate this tool from the sibling ign_headlines or ign_sections, so an agent may struggle to choose between them based on the description 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?
The description gives no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention when to prefer ign_headlines, ign_sections, or ign_article, nor any exclusions, so the agent must infer usage from the tool name.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.