Retrieve the 15 Mint section slugs accepted by livemint-headlines, including companies, markets, and videos. Each entry provides slug, name, and URL.
Get Mint sections. Lists the 15 Mint section slugs accepted by livemint-headlines, such as companies, markets, money, budget and videos. Each entry has its slug, display name and page url.
| 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 must carry the burden; it discloses that this is a fixed list of 15 section slugs and that each entry includes slug, display name, and page URL. For a zero-parameter read-only lookup, this is sufficient behavioral context, though it does not discuss caching or rate limits.
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 purpose and followed by the useful connection to livemint_headlines. Every sentence adds information without repetition.
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 simple zero-parameter lookup tool with no output schema, the description is complete: it states what is returned, how many items, and which fields each item contains. An agent has enough information to call it and use the result 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 has zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description does not need to explain parameter semantics, and the empty input schema is consistent with that.
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 Mint sections') and immediately clarifies that it returns the 15 section slugs accepted by `livemint-headlines`. This distinguishes it from sibling content-fetching tools like livemint_headlines and livemint_news.
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 clear usage context by tying the returned slugs to `livemint-headlines`, implying this is the lookup tool to use before filtering headlines by section. It does not explicitly state when not to use it or name alternatives, but the sibling reference is strong guidance.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.