Retrieve all The Japan Times editorial sections as a 60-link navigation inventory for building headlines or category feeds.
Get The Japan Times sections. Returns the complete 60-link editorial navigation inventory used by japantimes-headlines.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.17.9Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It usefully discloses the return cardinality (60 links) and that the content is a navigation inventory, but it never states that the operation is a safe read with no side effects, nor how sections are ordered or identified. Adequate but not rich 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?
Two short sentences, front-loaded with the primary action, and the second sentence adds a concrete, non-redundant detail about the payload. Nothing 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?
For a zero-parameter, no-output-schema listing tool, the description supplies what an agent needs: what it returns and its relationship to the headlines tool. It could say a bit more about the shape/ordering of the 60 entries, but it is essentially complete.
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, so per the rubric the baseline is 4. There is no parameter to explain and the description does not need to add syntax detail.
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 The Japan Times sections") and goes further by describing the payload as "the complete 60-link editorial navigation inventory." It also positions the tool relative to the japantimes_headlines sibling, so an agent can distinguish it without opening any schema.
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?
Mentioning that the inventory is "used by japantimes-headlines" implies a discovery-then-fetch relationship, but the description never states explicitly when to call this versus japantimes_headlines, japantimes_news, or japantimes_article. Usage is inferable, not spelled out.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.