Provide a canonical The Verge article URL to fetch its metadata and body paragraphs. Returns clean JSON for structured article data.
Get The Verge article content. Returns public The Verge article metadata and body paragraphs from a canonical article URL.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| url | Yes | Canonical The Verge article URL |
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 behavioral burden. It does disclose that the content is public and that the result is metadata and body paragraphs, implying a safe read operation. However, it doesn't explicitly confirm non-destructiveness, error behavior, or URL-format constraints beyond the schema.
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 two efficient sentences with the action and resource front-loaded and no filler or repetition. Every sentence earns its place.
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 single-parameter, read-only tool with no output schema, the description adequately names the input ('canonical article URL') and the output ('metadata and body paragraphs'). It doesn't detail the exact return structure, but the simplicity and full schema coverage make this a reasonable level of completeness.
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?
Schema description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description's phrase 'canonical article URL' adds no information beyond the schema's own property description, which already documents the URL parameter fully.
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 clear verb ('Get') and resource ('The Verge article content'), and concretely defines what is returned: metadata and body paragraphs. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like theverge_headlines and theverge_news by focusing on full article content, though it doesn't name those alternatives explicitly.
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 guidance about when to use this tool versus sibling tools such as theverge_headlines, theverge_news, or theverge_sections. The description only restates the action and provides no conditions, exclusions, or alternative routing, so the agent must infer usage entirely from the name.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.