Fetch ZDNet top stories as structured JSON with titles, URLs, summaries, publication times, and authors; video pages excluded.
Get ZDNet top stories. Returns the latest ZDNet top stories with no parameters. Each item has its title, canonical URL, summary, publication time and author name when available. Video pages are not included.
| 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, the description carries the full burden and does disclose useful traits: it itemizes returned fields and notes video pages are excluded. However, it says nothing about pagination, result count, rate limits, or freshness window for a fetch-all headlines 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?
Front-loaded with the core action and the key constraint (no parameters) early. There is mild redundancy between 'Get top stories' and 'Returns the latest top stories', but it is otherwise tight.
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 or annotations, the description does the needed work by listing the returned fields and the video exclusion. For a parameterless read tool this is nearly complete, though pagination/count expectations remain unspecified.
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 the baseline is 4. The description explicitly confirms no parameters are needed, which matches the empty schema and removes any ambiguity.
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 ZDNet top stories') and clarifies that video pages are excluded. It does not explicitly distinguish itself from the sibling zdnet_headlines, which overlaps conceptually with 'top stories', so the differentiation is incomplete.
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 guidance on when to use this versus zdnet_headlines, zdnet_article, or zdnet_sections. The 'no parameters' constraint is stated but no context or exclusions are given for choosing this tool.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.