Fetch current Washington Post stories as structured JSON, including titles, URLs, and publication or modification timestamps.
Get the latest Washington Post stories. Returns the current Washington Post news list with no parameters. Each item has its title, canonical url, published_at and last_modified, the last when the publisher supplies it. Items do not include summaries or authors.
| 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 exist, so the description carries the full burden. It does useful work disclosing the returned fields (title, url, published_at, last_modified) and their nullable nature, plus the deliberate omission of summaries and authors. However, it says nothing about freshness/refresh cadence, pagination, or failure behavior for a live-feed tool.
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?
Four short sentences, front-loaded with the purpose, followed by return-shape details that each carry information. No filler, though 'with no parameters' slightly restates the empty schema.
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 annotations and no output schema, the description compensates by enumerating the return fields and their gaps, which is exactly what an agent needs for a parameterless feed. Only the lack of routing guidance against wapo_headlines keeps it from being fully complete.
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 is nothing for the description to disambiguate. Baseline 4 applies; the schema is trivially complete for an empty object.
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 the latest Washington Post stories', and clarifies it returns a parameterless news list. It is clear on intent, but does not differentiate itself from the very similar sibling wapo_headlines, leaving an agent to guess between the two.
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?
There is no when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance, and no mention of alternatives. With siblings wapo_headlines, wapo_sections, and wapo_article sitting right next to it, the description offers nothing to help the agent route between them.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.