Fetch up to 100 Irish Times top stories from its Irish news listing, returning titles, URLs, summaries, authors, publication times, and images.
Get Irish Times top stories. Returns up to 100 current Irish Times top stories from its Irish news listing, with no parameters. Each item has its title, URL, summary, author, publication time and image where available.
| 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, and it does disclose useful traits: the operation is parameterless, capped at 100 items, sourced from a specific listing, and yields title, URL, summary, author, publication time and image 'where available'. It does not state freshness/update cadence or any auth or rate-limit constraints, but the result-shape disclosure is substantial for a no-annotation tool.
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 sentences, front-loaded with the verb and resource, then the scope/cap, then the field list. 'with no parameters' is mildly redundant given the empty input schema, but nothing else is wasted.
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?
There is no output schema, so the description usefully enumerates the returned fields and the 100-item cap. It remains slightly incomplete on freshness and on how it differs from irishtimes_headlines, but for a zero-parameter list tool it covers what an agent needs to call it 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 tool takes zero parameters, which is the baseline-4 case; there are no parameter semantics to explain. The phrase 'with no parameters' is consistent with the empty schema but adds nothing beyond it.
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 and resource ('Get Irish Times top stories') and pins the source to 'its Irish news listing', so the agent knows exactly what content comes back. However, it never distinguishes itself from the many sibling feeds, notably irishtimes_headlines and irishtimes_article, which an agent could easily confuse with this one.
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?
No when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance is given. With irishtimes_headlines, irishtimes_article, irishtimes_author and irishtimes_sections as siblings, the agent has no stated basis for choosing this tool over the alternative Irish Times feeds.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.