Fetch TechRadar top stories with titles, URLs, summaries, authors, images, and publication times; use techradar-headlines to narrow by section.
Get TechRadar top stories. Returns TechRadar's latest top stories across the site. Takes no parameters, and techradar-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?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It usefully discloses that the tool takes no parameters and enumerates the returned fields (title, URL, summary, publication time, author, image), which substitutes for a missing output schema, but it says nothing about rate limits, freshness/latency of 'latest', or result volume.
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 what it returns, then the sibling contrast, then the item shape. No filler or redundancy; every clause adds information.
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 zero-parameter feed with no output schema and no annotations, the description covers purpose, the alternative tool, and the item fields well enough to invoke and interpret results. It could add a note on result count or update cadence, but nothing essential 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, so the baseline is 4. The description's 'Takes no parameters' is consistent with the empty schema and confirms there is no hidden filtering dimension to supply.
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 TechRadar top stories') and immediately scopes it as site-wide top stories, explicitly contrasting with the sibling `techradar-headlines` which narrows by section. An agent can distinguish this from techradar_article, techradar_author, and techradar_headlines 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?
Names the alternative tool explicitly and gives the condition that selects it ('`techradar-headlines` narrows by section instead'), which is clear routing guidance. It does not spell out a when-not-to-use case beyond that contrast, so it falls short of the fully explicit 5.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.