Retrieve the full list of TIME RSS sections used by the headlines endpoint. Use it to discover valid section names for targeting specific news feeds.
Get TIME RSS sections. Returns the public TIME 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?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It implies a read-only public operation by saying 'public' and 'inventory,' but it does not explicitly state there are no side effects, no authentication, or any rate limits. For a simple listing tool it may be fine, but without annotations, more explicit disclosure is lacking.
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 concise sentences with no filler. The core purpose is front-loaded in the first sentence, and the second sentence adds context about its use. Every word 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 parameterless tool with no output schema, the description is fairly complete. It states what it returns and its relationship to headlines. It could elaborate on the format of the section inventory, but for a simple discovery tool the current level is adequate.
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 schema coverage is trivially 100%. With no parameters, the description needs to explain nothing about inputs, and the baseline of 4 applies. The description adds no parameter info because none 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-resource pair ('Get TIME RSS sections') and clarifies what it returns: the public TIME RSS section inventory used by the headlines endpoint. This is unambiguous and distinguishes it from other section tools by the TIME brand.
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 notes the result is 'used by the headlines endpoint,' which hints at its role, but it does not explicitly tell when to use this versus sibling section tools like nyt_sections or newyorker_sections. Given the large sibling set, more explicit differentiation would be helpful.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.