List all 37 WalesOnline sections and their slugs, names, and feed URLs so you can target valid sections in headlines queries.
Get WalesOnline sections. Lists the 37 WalesOnline sections accepted by walesonline-headlines, with nested slugs such as news/wales-news, sport/rugby and whats-on/food-drink-news. Each has a slug, a display name and a feed 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 discloses the cardinality (37), the return fields (slug, name, feed url), and the nested slug format, which is useful behavioral context. It's a read-only lookup with no disclosed side effects, but it doesn't explicitly state that it is safe/non-mutating.
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 the purpose, then the sibling relationship, then the return shape. No filler; every sentence 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?
With no output schema, the description steps in to describe the returned fields (slug, name, feed url) and gives concrete slug examples. For a simple zero-param lookup, this is complete enough to call and consume correctly.
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 there are no parameter semantics to explain; the description correctly notes 'Takes no parameters.' Baseline of 4 applies for a parameterless tool.
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 WalesOnline sections') and immediately differentiates from the sibling by noting these are the 37 sections accepted by `walesonline-headlines`. An agent can distinguish this lookup tool from the headlines tool without opening either schema.
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 'sections accepted by `walesonline-headlines`' implies the intended usage: resolve valid section slugs before calling the headlines tool. It gives clear context but does not explicitly state when NOT to use it or name an alternative beyond that implicit dependency.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.