Retrieve The Hill's RSS section inventory to identify valid categories for the headlines endpoint. Returns public section names for targeted news queries.
Get The Hill RSS sections. Returns the public The Hill RSS section inventory used by the headlines endpoint.
| 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 and usefully discloses that the data is public, RSS-based, and acts as an inventory for the headlines endpoint. For a zero-parameter read-only tool, this is sufficient behavioral context.
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?
Two short sentences with no filler. The core action is front-loaded, and the second sentence earns its place by adding public/inventory/headlines context.
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-argument inventory tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is complete: it names the source (The Hill), the format (RSS), the access level (public), and the relationship to the headlines endpoint. An agent can invoke it correctly without further information.
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 and the schema fully reflects that, so there are no parameter semantics to document. The baseline of 4 applies because no parameter description is needed.
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 states a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('The Hill RSS sections'), and clarifies that it returns the public section inventory used by the headlines endpoint. This distinguishes it from siblings like thehill_headlines, thehill_news, and thehill_article.
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 phrase 'used by the headlines endpoint' gives clear context that this tool provides the section inventory needed for headline calls. It does not explicitly name when-not-to-use alternatives, so it stops short of a 5.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.