Fetch top stories from The Independent's public RSS feed, returning clean JSON for news monitoring and analysis.
Get The Independent top stories. Returns fresh The Independent top stories from its 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 behavior disclosure. It adds useful context that this is a read-only fetch from a public RSS feed and that stories are 'fresh,' implying no authentication or filtering. However, it does not disclose output count, pagination, feed update latency, or what an empty feed returns.
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 short sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose. The second sentence adds 'fresh' and 'public RSS feed' but largely repeats the first sentence's resource reference; minor redundancy, though overall compact.
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 fetcher, the description gives enough information for an agent to invoke it safely. The lack of an output schema is partially mitigated by the simple 'top stories' return value implied by the RSS source, but no return structure is described. Still, the tool is simple enough that this is a minor gap.
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 the schema already communicates everything needed (an empty object). The description correctly avoids inventing parameters, and the baseline for 0-param tools is 4.
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 ('Get') and resource ('The Independent top stories') and discloses the source ('public RSS feed'). It is clearly distinct from sibling tools that fetch specific articles or authors, but it does not explicitly distinguish itself from independent_headlines, which could plausibly overlap. Overall clear, though sibling differentiation is left to inference.
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 prefer this tool over independent_headlines, independent_sections, or other news tools in the sibling list. It only states what it does, not when to use it or which alternative to choose.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.