Fetch XDA top stories as structured JSON, including title, URL, summary, publication time, authors, and lead image—no parameters required.
Get XDA top stories. Returns about 10 of the latest XDA top stories with no parameters. Each item has its title, canonical URL, summary, publication time, author names (co-authors joined with a comma) and lead image.
| 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 provided, the description carries full burden and does well: it discloses the approximate result count (~10), the returned fields, and the co-author joining convention. It omits ordering semantics and any auth/rate-limit context, but the output shape disclosure is substantive.
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, zero waste, operation stated first followed by return details. 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?
No output schema exists, so the description must describe returns, and it does so with item count and field list. For a zero-param read tool this is nearly complete; only ordering/freshness semantics are unstated.
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?
Zero parameters, so baseline is 4; the description explicitly confirms 'with no parameters', which is consistent with the empty schema.
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?
Specific verb 'Get' plus resource 'XDA top stories' makes the operation clear. However, it does not distinguish itself from siblings like xda_headlines, xda_article, or xda_sections, leaving the exact scope ('top stories' vs 'headlines') ambiguous.
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 note 'with no parameters' implies a simple fire-and-forget fetch, so usage is inferable. But there is no explicit when-to-use guidance, no mention of when to prefer xda_article/xda_headlines, and no exclusions.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.