Fetch Philadelphia Inquirer top stories from its public news feed, delivering fresh headlines for news monitoring. Associated Press wire copy is excluded.
Get Philadelphia Inquirer top stories. Returns fresh Philadelphia Inquirer top stories from the public news feed. Associated Press wire copy is not included.
| 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 present, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It communicates source, freshness, and a content exclusion, but it does not describe response format, story count, pagination, or rate limits. This is adequate for a simple read-only fetch but not richly 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 short and readable, but the first and second sentences are redundant ('Philadelphia Inquirer top stories' appears twice). It could be condensed without losing meaning, so not every sentence earns its place.
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 news feed tool, the description provides the essential context: source, freshness, and the AP wire exclusion. There is no output schema, so more detail about the returned payload would help, but the simplicity of the tool lowers that need.
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 and an empty schema, so there is no parameter documentation burden. The baseline for no-parameter tools applies.
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 states a specific function: retrieve Philadelphia Inquirer top stories from the public news feed. It adds useful scope by excluding Associated Press wire copy, though it does not explicitly distinguish itself from sibling tools like phillyinquirer_headlines or phillyinquirer_article.
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 this is the tool to use for top stories from the public news feed and notes that AP wire copy is not included. However, it does not name alternative tools or state when one should choose this over related Philadelphia Inquirer tools.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.