Retrieve current headlines from a specified New York Magazine section. Provide the section slug to get clean JSON headlines for Intelligencer, The Cut, Vulture, and other sections.
Get New York Magazine section headlines. Returns fresh headlines from one public New York Magazine section.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| section | Yes | New York Magazine section slug |
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 full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states that it returns 'fresh headlines' from a public section, but does not disclose any caveats, rate limits, pagination, or return format. For a simple read operation, this is minimal but leaves uncertainty about output structure.
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 sentences with no redundancy. It front-loads the purpose and is appropriately sized for a simple tool. Every word contributes value.
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 a single enum parameter and no output schema, the description is minimal but not fully complete. It does not specify the return format (e.g., list of headline strings, objects with URLs) or any usage notes, which is a gap given the lack of an output schema.
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 schema already provides a full description for the 'section' parameter and an enum of valid values. The tool description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema provides, and since schema coverage is 100%, the baseline of 3 is appropriate.
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 the action ('Get') and resource ('New York Magazine section headlines'), and notes it returns fresh headlines from a public section. It distinguishes the tool from other publications' headline tools but does not explicitly differentiate it from sibling nymag tools like nymag_news or nymag_sections.
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?
No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention that it is specifically for headlines, nor does it indicate when to use nymag_article or other related tools. This leaves the agent to infer usage from the name alone.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.