Fetch top stories from Newsmax's public RSS feed, returning clean JSON for news monitoring and aggregation.
Get Newsmax top stories. Returns fresh Newsmax top stories from its public 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 transparency burden. It does add useful context by noting the data comes from a public RSS feed and is 'fresh,' implying no authentication is needed and the data is current. However, it does not describe output shape, pagination, or limits, so coverage is only partial.
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 short and front-loaded with the primary action. The second sentence adds value by mentioning freshness and the RSS feed source, though it repeats 'Newsmax top stories,' which creates mild redundancy. Still, it remains appropriately concise.
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 top-stories fetch, the description covers the essential use case. However, with no output schema and no annotations, it leaves the returned item structure unspecified and does not explain how this tool relates to nearby siblings such as newsmax_headlines or newsmax_sections, which is a notable gap for an agent selecting among them.
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 and an empty input schema, so there are no parameter semantics for the description to clarify. The description correctly adds nothing about parameters, which is appropriate; the baseline of 4 applies because no parameter documentation is needed.
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 a specific action and resource: get Newsmax top stories. It also identifies the source as a public RSS feed. However, it does not differentiate this tool from sibling tools like newsmax_headlines or newsmax_sections, so the distinction is left to inference.
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?
There is no guidance about when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description simply restates the purpose and does not mention any exclusions, prerequisites, or conditions under which a sibling tool like newsmax_headlines would be a better choice.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.