Retrieve Mashable's category taxonomy with public RSS feeds, providing valid sections for the headlines endpoint.
Get Mashable sections. Returns the public Mashable category taxonomy accepted by the headlines endpoint. Only categories that publish a working public RSS feed are listed.
| 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 behavioral information. It discloses that only categories with a working public RSS feed are listed, which is a meaningful filtering behavior beyond a naive section list. It accurately describes the read-only nature without conflicting with any structured data.
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 two sentences with no wasted words. The primary action is front-loaded, and the second sentence supplies essential detail about the RSS filter and the link to headlines.
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 tool, the description gives enough context to call it correctly: it returns a taxonomy that can be fed into the headlines endpoint, and it explicitly notes the feed constraint. While the exact data structure isn't specified, the description is sufficient for an agent to understand the purpose and applicability.
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?
There are zero parameters and the schema is empty, so the description has no parameter semantics to explain. Per the baseline for no parameters, a score of 4 is appropriate.
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 opens with 'Get Mashable sections,' clearly identifying the verb and resource. It adds that it returns the 'public Mashable category taxonomy accepted by the headlines endpoint,' which distinguishes it from other section-related tools and ties it to a companion endpoint.
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 phrase 'accepted by the headlines endpoint' implies this tool is a prerequisite for calling mashable_headlines with valid category values, providing clear contextual usage. It doesn't explicitly name alternatives or when-not-to-use, but for a zero-parameter support tool this is adequate.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.