List all 13 top-level USA Today sections, including news, sports, politics, and grocery, to find valid slug, name, and URL values for headlines queries.
List USA Today sections. Lists the 13 top-level USA Today sections accepted by usatoday-headlines, from news and sports to politics and grocery. Each has a slug, a display name and a landing-page url. Takes no parameters.
| 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 burden. It states that the tool takes no parameters and returns a slug, name, and landing-page URL for each section, making the read-only list behavior and output shape clear. It does not mention auth or rate limits, but those are not critical for a zero-parameter static list.
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 short sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose, then the sibling relationship, then the output fields and no-parameter note. Every sentence adds useful information without waste.
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?
The tool is simple, has no output schema, and the description fully covers what an agent needs: purpose, count, examples, accepted by which sibling, and returned fields. Nothing material 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?
There are zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description reinforces this by explicitly stating 'Takes no parameters,' which is helpful even though the empty schema already communicates it.
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 (List) and resource (USA Today sections), and distinguishes itself by naming the sibling tool `usatoday-headlines` whose accepted section values it enumerates. It also specifies the count and examples, so an agent can immediately understand its role.
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 clearly implies when to use it: to discover valid section identifiers accepted by `usatoday-headlines`. It lacks an explicit when-not condition or mention of other alternatives, but the context is strong enough for correct routing.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.