Retrieve current NJ.com top stories with titles, canonical URLs, short summaries, authors, publication times, and images for quick news monitoring.
Get NJ.com top stories. Returns current NJ.com top stories, including title, canonical URL, short summary, author, publication time, and image where available. Category discovery, section headlines, and article and author routes are not available.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.17.7Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does disclose the return shape (title, canonical URL, summary, author, publication time, image) and that results are 'current.' It does not mention freshness cadence, result count, or auth/rate considerations, leaving modest gaps for a no-parameter read tool.
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?
Three short sentences, purpose front-loaded, then return fields, then exclusions. Slight redundancy in restating 'NJ.com top stories' in the first two sentences, but no wasted content.
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?
No output schema exists, and the description compensates by enumerating the returned fields, so an agent knows what it will receive. It omits detail on result count/ordering and update frequency, which would round out completeness for a feed endpoint.
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 zero parameters, so per the rubric the baseline is 4. The description introduces no parameters and needs none, and nothing contradicts the empty schema.
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 and resource ('Get NJ.com top stories') and scopes it to the site's front-page feed, which distinguishes it from the many other *_news/*_headlines siblings covering different publishers. An agent can identify the tool without opening the schema.
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 closing sentence explicitly rules out category discovery, section headlines, and article/author routes, which is genuine when-not guidance and prevents mis-invocation. It stops short of naming a specific alternative tool to use for those needs, so it falls short of a 5.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.