Retrieve current Page Six top stories as structured JSON, including titles, URLs, and optional summaries, authors, timestamps, and images.
Get Page Six top stories. Returns the current Page Six top stories, with no parameters. Each item has a title and URL, and may include summary, author, publication time and image. Use pagesix-headlines to read one section.
| 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 full burden, and it does meaningfully: it states the tool takes no parameters and itemizes the return shape (title, URL, optional summary, author, publication time, image). It omits safety/permission framing and rate-limit behavior, but for a read-only top-stories feed the disclosure is solid.
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?
Four short sentences, each earning its place: purpose, param count, return fields, and the sibling alternative. Purpose is front-loaded and there is no filler.
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?
There is no output schema, so the description must describe the return shape, and it does so at the field level. Combined with the zero-param schema, an agent has everything it needs to call this correctly; only richer behavioral notes (auth, freshness) are 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 tool has zero parameters, which sets a baseline of 4. The description reinforces this with "with no parameters," correctly telling the agent it can call this with an empty argument object.
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?
"Get Page Six top stories" is a specific verb+resource, and it explicitly distinguishes itself from the sibling pagesix-headlines ("read one section"). It does not differentiate from pagesix_article or pagesix_sections, so it falls short of a perfect 5.
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?
It names an alternative (pagesix-headlines) and the condition that selects it (reading a single section), giving clear routing guidance. It offers no when-not guidance against the broader family (pagesix_article, pagesix_sections), so it stops short of the 5 bar.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.