Retrieve the list of Moneycontrol news sections accepted by the headlines endpoint, so you can request valid sections when fetching financial news.
Get Moneycontrol sections. Returns the Moneycontrol news sections accepted by the headlines endpoint.
| 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?
With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It states the tool returns sections, which is a read-only behavior, but does not disclose details like output format, ordering, or potential rate limits. For a zero-parameter lookup this is acceptable but not rich.
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 filler. The key action is front-loaded ('Get Moneycontrol sections') and the second sentence adds necessary context about its relation to the headlines endpoint.
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 tool with no output schema, the description fully explains what the tool does and why it exists. It could mention the shape of the returned data (e.g., array of strings), but that is not required for correct invocation.
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 baskets, so the schema coverage is automatically 100%. The description adds no parameter details because none exist, which earns the baseline 4 for this scenario.
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 'Get Moneycontrol sections' with a specific verb and resource, and further clarifies it returns the sections accepted by the headlines endpoint. This distinguishes it from sibling news tools like moneycontrol_headlines and similarly named section tools for other outlets.
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 implies the tool should be used to discover valid section values for the headlines endpoint, providing clear context for when to call it. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the context is strong enough for an agent to infer its role.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.