Fetch top TechCrunch stories from the home feed and return titles, URLs, summaries, publication times, and authors as structured JSON for news monitoring.
Get TechCrunch top stories. Returns the latest TechCrunch top stories from its home feed. Takes no parameters. Each item has its title, URL, summary, publication time and author name.
| 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?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It discloses the data source (home feed) and explicitly states there are no parameters, which reduces invocation ambiguity, but says nothing about freshness guarantees, ordering, pagination, or rate limits.
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?
Front-loads the purpose, which is good, but the first two sentences are redundant ('Get TechCrunch top stories' / 'Returns the latest TechCrunch top stories from its home feed'). The return-field sentence earns its place, but the opening could be tightened.
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?
With no output schema, the description usefully enumerates the returned fields (title, URL, summary, publication time, author). For a no-parameter feed tool this is largely sufficient, though it omits ordering and count of items.
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?
There are zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description reinforces this with 'Takes no parameters,' removing any doubt about required inputs.
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 ('Get') and resource ('TechCrunch top stories') and clarifies the source is the home feed, which is concrete. It does not, however, distinguish itself from near-identical siblings like techcrunch_headlines, techcrunch_article, or techcrunch_sections, so an agent must infer the difference.
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 never says when to use this tool versus techcrunch_headlines or techcrunch_article, nor does it give any conditions or exclusions. 'Takes no parameters' hints at simplicity but is not usage guidance.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.