Fetch current Seattle Times headlines for a specified section, returning structured results from one public section feed.
Get Seattle Times section headlines. Returns fresh headlines from one public Seattle Times section feed.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| section | Yes | Seattle Times section slug |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.17.5Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavior. It only mentions 'fresh headlines' which implies recency but does not describe return format, pagination, limits, or any side effects. For a read tool, this is minimal disclosure and insufficient given the absence of annotation support.
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 redundant information. It front-loads the purpose and immediately clarifies the data source. Every word earns its place; no fluff.
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 simple one-parameter tool without an output schema, the description should at least indicate the return structure. It says 'Returns fresh headlines' but does not specify whether it returns an array, object, or paginated results. It also omits any details about rate limits or sorting. The tool is not complex, but the missing output schema leaves a gap.
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 fully documents the single 'section' parameter with an enum and description. The description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema. With 100% schema coverage, the baseline of 3 applies; the description does not compensate with examples or clarifications.
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 'Get Seattle Times section headlines' with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling seattletimes_article, seattletimes_author, seattletimes_news, and seattletimes_sections by focusing on section headlines. The phrase 'from one public Seattle Times section feed' adds specificity about the data source.
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 tool is for fetching headlines from a specific Seattle Times section, but it does not explicitly state when to use it versus alternatives like seattletimes_news or nyt_headlines. No when-not or alternative conditions are given, only an implied usage context.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.