Get Polygon's main stories across games and entertainment, returning titles, URLs, summaries, authors, timestamps, and images. No parameters required.
Get Polygon top stories. Returns Polygon's latest top stories across the site, covering games and entertainment. Takes no parameters, and polygon-headlines narrows by section instead. Each item has its title, URL, summary, publication time, author and image.
| 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 and no output schema, the description carries the full disclosure burden. It discloses the return contents (title, URL, summary, publication time, author, image) and confirms the no-parameter, read-only nature via 'Get'. It omits any pagination/result-count or rate-limit behavior, which is the remaining gap.
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?
Three short sentences, front-loaded with verb+resource, then the alternative routing, then the return shape. Every sentence earns its place with no 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?
No output schema exists, so the description correctly supplies the return fields. For a no-parameter read tool with no annotations, nothing an agent needs to call it correctly 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 tool has zero parameters, which is the baseline-4 case. The description explicitly confirms 'Takes no parameters, and `polygon-headlines` narrows by section instead', removing ambiguity about how scope is controlled.
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?
Specific verb+resource ('Get Polygon top stories') with explicit scope ('across the site, covering games and entertainment'), and it names the sibling `polygon-headlines` as the section-filtered alternative. An agent can distinguish it from polygon_headlines, polygon_article, and polygon_sections without opening any schema.
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 states the operation takes no parameters and names the alternative (`polygon-headlines`) with the condition that selects it ('narrows by section instead'). The when-to-use choice is fully specified, not left to inference.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.