Fetch top IOL (Independent Online, South Africa) stories from its public news feed. Retrieve current headlines and article summaries in clean JSON.
Get IOL top stories. Returns fresh IOL (Independent Online, South Africa) stories from the public news 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?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It states the tool returns 'fresh' stories from a 'public news feed,' implying a read-only operation, but it does not disclose pagination, result count, or return structure. It adds some context beyond the name but lacks behavioral depth.
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 sentences with no wasted words. The action verb and resource are front-loaded, and the second sentence adds clarifying context about the source. Efficient and appropriately sized.
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 the tool's low complexity (no parameters, no annotations, no output schema), the description provides sufficient context for an agent to invoke it. It names the source, content type, and freshness. It could mention the response format, but for a simple zero-parameter news feed 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 there is no schema to explain. The description does not need to compensate for any parameter documentation gap. The baseline of 4 for no parameters 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 clearly states the tool retrieves 'IOL top stories' and expands the acronym to Independent Online, South Africa. It identifies the specific resource (top stories from the public news feed), but does not explicitly distinguish itself from sibling tools like iol_headlines or iol_article.
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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention sibling tools like iol_headlines, iol_article, or iol_sections, nor any conditions that would make this tool the preferred choice.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.