List This Is Money sections with slug, name, and URL to query headlines by section.
Get This Is Money sections. Lists the This Is Money sections that the headlines endpoint accepts, such as money, markets, savings, pensions, mortgages, property and cars. Each entry has a slug, a display name and a section url.
| 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 provided, the description carries the burden and does disclose the return shape (slug, display name, section url), which is valuable since no output schema exists. It's evidently a safe read-only lookup, though it doesn't explicitly confirm that or describe cardinality/pagination.
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 compact sentences, front-loaded with purpose, then accepted values, then return fields. Every sentence earns its place with no redundancy.
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 parameterless listing tool with no output schema, the description covers purpose, linkage to the headlines endpoint, example values, and return fields. It omits nothing critical, though explicit read-only confirmation would fully close the gap left by missing annotations.
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 input parameters, so per the rubric the baseline is 4. The description correctly adds no parameter detail because none exist, and instead describes the output fields.
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 This Is Money sections') and immediately clarifies scope by tying them to the headlines endpoint. The examples of slugs (money, markets, savings...) make the resource concrete and distinguishable from sibling _sections tools for other publishers.
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 frames the tool as the lookup for sections 'that the headlines endpoint accepts', giving clear context for when to call it relative to thisismoney_headlines. It stops short of an explicit when/when-not statement or naming alternatives such as thisismoney_news.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.