Fetch National Post top stories from its public RSS feed, delivering fresh news articles in JSON for quick updates.
Get National Post top stories. Returns fresh National Post stories from the public site-wide RSS feed.
| 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, the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It does disclose that the data comes from a public RSS feed and is 'fresh', implying no auth is needed and results are recent. It does not detail output structure or limits, but for a simple read-only feed tool the key behavioral traits are present.
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 short sentences with no filler. The main action is front-loaded ('Get National Post top stories') and the supporting detail about the RSS feed is compact and relevant.
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 no-parameter, simple feed-fetching tool, the description is nearly complete: it states the source, scope, and freshness. It does not define what fields a 'story' contains and there is no output schema, but the tool is simple enough that an agent can invoke it without that detail.
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 input schema is empty, so there are no parameter semantics to document. The baseline for zero-parameter tools is 4, and the description adds no conflicting or missing parameter information.
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 names a specific verb and resource ('Get National Post top stories') and adds a useful source detail ('public site-wide RSS feed'). It clearly indicates what the tool returns, but it does not explicitly differentiate it from sibling tools like nationalpost_headlines or nationalpost_news, so it falls just short of a 5.
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 is for current, site-wide top stories rather than specific articles or sections, but it provides no explicit when-to-use guidance or alternatives. An agent must infer the right choice from the tool name and sibling list.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.