Retrieve headlines from a chosen This Is Money RSS section (e.g., markets, savings). Returns article titles as clean JSON for easy integration.
Get This Is Money section headlines. Returns fresh headlines from one public This Is Money RSS section.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| section | Yes | This Is Money section slug |
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. It discloses that the tool returns 'fresh headlines' from a 'public' RSS section, implying a non-destructive read. However, it does not describe output format, pagination, error behavior, or any limits. It adds a bit of context but is minimal.
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 sentences with no filler. The purpose is front-loaded, and the description is appropriately sized for a simple tool.
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 tool with one enum parameter and no output schema, the description is mostly complete but omits what the return value looks like (e.g., list of strings). It could mention that it returns a list of headlines, but the core behavior is understandable.
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 coverage is 100% for the single parameter, so the baseline is 3. The description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema; it does not elaborate on the section slugs or behavior for invalid 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?
The description clearly states the verb 'Get' and resource 'This Is Money section headlines', and specifies it returns headlines from a public RSS section. It is specific enough to distinguish from sibling tools like thisismoney_article or thisismoney_author, though it does not explicitly name them.
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?
No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like thisismoney_news or other headlines tools. The description does not mention exclusions, prerequisites, or which sibling to choose instead.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.