Fetch 9to5Google top stories and recent article metadata with short summaries from its public RSS feed to track tech news quickly.
Get 9to5Google top stories. Returns recent 9to5Google story metadata and short summaries from its public RSS feed.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.17.9Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries the full burden, and it does disclose that the data comes from a public RSS feed and that results are recent metadata plus short summaries. It stops short of stating freshness/update cadence, result-count limits, or any rate/usage constraints for a tool whose behavior is otherwise only implied as read-only.
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 short sentences, front-loaded with the purpose and followed by the return shape and source. Nothing is redundant and every clause adds information.
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 read tool with no output schema, the description adequately conveys both the source and the return content (metadata and short summaries). The only shortfall is the missing routing distinction from the near-identical headlines sibling.
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 takes no parameters, so there is no parameter semantics to explain; the baseline for a zero-parameter tool applies. The description correctly makes no false promises about filtering or pagination options.
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?
States a specific verb (Get) and resource (9to5Google top stories) and adds the data source (public RSS feed), so the agent knows exactly what it fetches. However, it does not distinguish itself from the very similar sibling ninetofivegoogle_headlines, leaving ambiguity about which of the two to call for a basic story list.
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 on when to use this tool versus the siblings ninetofivegoogle_headlines, ninetofivegoogle_article, ninetofivegoogle_sections, or ninetofivegoogle_author. The reader is left to infer that this is the general top-stories feed, with no stated preconditions or exclusions.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.