Fetches Space.com top stories with titles, URLs, summaries, authors, publication times and images for quick space, astronomy and skywatching news updates.
Get Space.com top stories. Returns the latest Space.com top stories (space, astronomy and skywatching news) from the site's latest-news hub. Takes no parameters. Each item has its title, URL, summary, author, publication time 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, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It usefully discloses the return shape (title, URL, summary, author, publication time, image) despite there being no output schema, which is genuinely helpful. However, it says nothing about freshness, pagination, result count, or rate limits, so it is adequate but not rich.
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 the core purpose. Minor redundancy in restating 'Space.com top stories' twice, but no filler and every part is readable.
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 no-param news feed with no output schema, the description covers what the tool returns and what each item contains. It is essentially complete for this complexity level, lacking only freshness/pagination detail.
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 takes zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description explicitly confirms 'Takes no parameters,' matching the empty schema, and requires no further parameter explanation.
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?
States a specific verb and resource ('Get Space.com top stories') and clarifies the content domain (space, astronomy, skywatching news) plus the source hub. It is distinguishable from unrelated siblings, but it does not explicitly differentiate itself from close siblings like space_headlines or space_article, so it stops short of a 5.
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?
There is no when-to-use guidance and no named alternatives. It does not tell the agent when to prefer this top-stories feed over space_headlines, space_article, or space_sections. Only the 'takes no parameters' note hints at usage.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.