Retrieve top stories from 7NEWS Australia's public news feed. Returns structured JSON for tracking current Australian headlines.
Get 7NEWS Australia top stories. Returns fresh 7NEWS (7news.com.au) top stories from the public site-wide news feed.
| 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 of disclosing behavior. It mentions 'fresh' and 'public', implying recency and no auth, but does not describe return format, pagination, or any potential limitations. It adds minimal context beyond the name, though it does not contradict any annotations (none exist).
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 a single, concise sentence that front-loads the main action and source. There is no wasted wording, and it is appropriately sized for a simple read tool.
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 no-parameter, read-only news feed tool, the description is largely sufficient. It states what it returns (top stories) and the source (public feed). While it doesn't detail output structure, the absence of an output schema and the simplicity of the operation make this acceptable. It could be improved by clarifying how 'top stories' is defined or how it differs from 'headlines', but it is not critically incomplete.
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 input schema is trivially complete. The description doesn't need to explain parameters, and it adds no parameter-specific meaning. Baseline for 0 params is 4, which is appropriate here.
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 the tool's purpose: 'Get 7NEWS Australia top stories' and specifies the source as 'public site-wide news feed'. This is a specific verb+resource that distinguishes it from related tools like sevennewsau_article or sevennewsau_author by focusing on top stories from the feed.
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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as sevennewsau_headlines, sevennewsau_sections, or other news outlet tools. It does not mention any exclusions or conditions, leaving the agent to infer usage context.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.