Fetch India Today top stories from its public RSS feed, returning text news only and omitting video and photo items.
Get India Today top stories. Returns fresh India Today top stories from its public RSS feed (text stories only; video and photo items are omitted).
| 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 behavioral transparency burden. It discloses that the tool reads a public RSS feed and, importantly, that video and photo items are omitted so only text stories are returned. This adds useful behavioral context beyond the basic purpose, though it does not discuss output format or response details.
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 compact and front-loaded, stating the main action in the first sentence and adding the key filtering detail in the second. There is slight redundancy in repeating "India Today top stories," but every sentence contributes useful information.
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 tool, the description provides enough context to call it correctly: it names the source, the freshness, and the text-only filter. It does not describe the exact return shape or fields, but this is not a significant gap for a simple top-stories fetch tool.
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 and an empty input schema, so there is little for the description to add. The baseline for no-parameter tools is 4, and the description confirms the operation is a simple fetch with no required inputs.
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 uses a specific verb and resource: "Get India Today top stories" and names the source (public RSS feed). It clearly identifies what the tool returns, but it does not explicitly differentiate itself from siblings like indiatoday_headlines or indiatoday_news, so it stops short of full sibling differentiation.
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 implies usage: call it when you need the latest India Today top stories. However, it offers no explicit guidance about when to choose this tool over alternatives such as indiatoday_headlines or indiatoday_sections, and it names no exclusions or alternative routing.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.