List the five Times of Israel section slugs, names, and URLs accepted by the headlines endpoint, enabling headline queries by section.
Get Times of Israel sections. Lists the five Times of Israel sections that the headlines endpoint accepts: israel-and-the-region, israel-inside, jewish-times, real-estate-israel and tech-israel. 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, the description carries the full burden, and it does disclose the exact contents (five named sections) and the shape of each entry (slug, name, url). 'Get/List' implies a safe read. It does not state read-only status, rate limits, or auth needs, but for a static taxonomy listing those gaps are minor.
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?
Front-loaded with the core verb+resource in the first sentence, then the enumeration and return shape. The five-slug list is long but earns its place by giving the agent concrete valid values. No filler sentences.
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-param, no-output-schema listing tool, the description is complete: it says what the tool returns, how many entries, their fields, and the relationship to the headlines endpoint. Nothing an agent needs to invoke it correctly is missing.
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 takes zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description adds relevant meaning by enumerating the exact slug values an agent would pass elsewhere, which is more than the empty schema conveys.
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 Times of Israel sections') and immediately clarifies scope: the fixed set of five sections accepted by the headlines endpoint. This distinguishes it from siblings like timesofisrael_headlines or timesofisrael_news, which return content rather than the section taxonomy.
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 'the five Times of Israel sections that the headlines endpoint accepts' gives clear usage context, implying this is the lookup to run before filtering timesofisrael_headlines. It stops short of an explicit 'call this first' instruction or a named alternative, so it is clear context rather than full when/when-not guidance.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.