Retrieve the Philadelphia Inquirer's public section taxonomy for use with the headlines endpoint, so you can query valid sections by name.
Get Philadelphia Inquirer sections. Returns the public Philadelphia Inquirer section taxonomy accepted by the headlines endpoint.
| 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 burden. It discloses that the taxonomy is 'public' and ties it to the headlines endpoint, but does not mention any other behavioral aspects such as pagination, rate limits, or return format. For a simple read-only retriever, this is acceptable but lacking depth.
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 concise sentences with no wasted words. It front-loads the action and resource, then adds a relevant detail about the taxonomy's purpose.
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 tool, the description adequately explains what is returned and its relevance to the headlines endpoint. Without an output schema, it leaves the exact structure of the taxonomy unspecified, but that is a minor gap for such a straightforward 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 has zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description does not need to add parameter semantics since there are none to describe.
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 it gets Philadelphia Inquirer sections, with a specific verb and resource. It further distinguishes itself by noting it returns the taxonomy accepted by the headlines endpoint, which is a clear differentiator from sibling tools like phillyinquirer_headlines or phillyinquirer_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 provides clear context by mentioning the returned taxonomy is 'accepted by the headlines endpoint', implying this tool is used to obtain valid section values for headlines. It does not explicitly list when-not-to-use or alternatives, but the context is strong enough for an agent to infer usage.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.