Retrieve the complete list of New York Daily News editorial sections for content mapping or navigation.
Get New York Daily News sections. Returns the public New York Daily News editorial section inventory.
| 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?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states that the tool returns the public editorial section inventory, implying a read-only, no-auth operation. It does not detail output shape or pagination, but for a zero-parameter list tool this is reasonably transparent.
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 core action is front-loaded ('Get New York Daily News sections'), and the second sentence adds the useful qualifier 'public editorial section inventory' without redundancy.
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 tool with no parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description adequately explains what the tool returns. It could be more explicit about the structure of the section inventory, but nothing essential for selecting and invoking the tool is missing.
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 has zero properties and 100% schema description coverage, so there are no parameters requiring documentation. The description correctly adds no parameter information, matching the baseline for a parameterless tool.
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 uses a specific verb and resource: 'Get New York Daily News sections.' It further clarifies the resource as 'the public New York Daily News editorial section inventory,' which clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like nydailynews_article, nydailynews_author, nydailynews_headlines, and nydailynews_news.
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 when to use the tool: when an agent needs the New York Daily News section list. However, it provides no explicit guidance about when not to use it or how it compares to alternative section tools for other publications, leaving usage context mostly implicit.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.