Fetch current headlines from a selected Us Weekly RSS section. Pick a section slug to receive fresh article titles, with photo galleries excluded.
Get Us Weekly section headlines. Returns fresh headlines from one public Us Weekly RSS section. Photo galleries are not included.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| section | Yes | Us Weekly RSS 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 full burden and does a good job: it discloses the data source (public RSS), freshness ('fresh headlines'), single-section scope, and the gallery exclusion. It stops short of mentioning return format, pagination, or rate limits, but for a simple headlines tool these are minor omissions.
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 zero waste. The main action is front-loaded, and each clause adds distinct information: source, freshness, single-section scope, and photo-gallery exclusion.
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 one-parameter tool with a complete enum and no output schema, the description covers the core behavior and key exclusions. It does not specify the exact return format or mention how to obtain section slugs beyond the enum, but these are minor gaps.
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%: the single section parameter is documented as 'Us Weekly RSS section slug' and backed by a full enum of 12 values. The description adds little beyond reinforcing the one-section and no-gallery behavior, so the baseline 3 is appropriate.
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 Us Weekly section headlines.' It also clarifies the tool is RSS-based, returns only one section at a time, and excludes photo galleries, which differentiates it from sibling tools like usmagazine_article, usmagazine_news, and usmagazine_sections.
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 implies usage for fetching headlines from a single Us Weekly section and notes photo galleries are not included, but it does not explicitly name alternative tools or state when-not-to-use. The enum provides section choices, but there is no routing guidance toward related tools like usmagazine_article for full articles.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.