Fetch public NDTV article metadata and body paragraphs from a canonical article URL. Use it to extract story text and check premium status from NDTV pages.
Get NDTV article content. Returns public NDTV article metadata and body paragraphs from a canonical article URL. premium is true for NDTV Premium stories; paragraphs are always the text NDTV serves on its public page.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| url | Yes | Canonical NDTV article URL |
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 disclosure burden. It explains the tool returns public metadata/body paragraphs, and clarifies that 'paragraphs are always the text NDTV serves on its public page' even for premium stories. This gives useful behavioral context about paywall handling, though it does not address error cases 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?
Two sentences, zero filler. The primary purpose is front-loaded in the first sentence, and the second sentence adds a valuable behavior detail about premium stories without decorating language.
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 one-parameter tool with no output schema, the description covers the essential behavioral expectations: what is returned (metadata and body paragraphs) and the premium caveat. It doesn't enumerate metadata fields, but the tool's simplicity means this is not a major gap.
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?
Schema coverage is 100%: the single 'url' parameter is described as 'Canonical NDTV article URL.' The description repeats the canonical URL concept but adds no new format or syntax guidance beyond what the schema already provides, so the baseline of 3 applies.
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 NDTV article content' and explicitly states it 'Returns public NDTV article metadata and body paragraphs from a canonical article URL.' This is a specific verb+resource+output combination that clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like ndtv_headlines or ndtv_author.
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 makes clear this tool is for retrieving a specific article's content when you have a canonical URL, and it notes the premium/public distinction. However, it does not explicitly say when to prefer this over alternatives such as ndtv_headlines or ndtv_news, nor does it mention exclusions.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.