Extract top stories or search results from Hacker News using a direct URL or plain search query.
Extract top stories or search results from Hacker News. Accepts an HN/Algolia URL or a plain search query while preserving the url field for compatibility.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| url | Yes | HN URL e.g. https://news.ycombinator.com/news, Algolia API URL, or search query e.g. 'browser agents' | |
| max_length | No |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.5.1Input schema / properties / url / descriptionPrevious value: -"HN URL e.g. https://news.ycombinator.com or https://hn.algolia.com/?q=..."New value: +"HN URL e.g. https://news.ycombinator.com/news, Algolia API URL, or search query e.g. 'browser agents'"Input schema / properties / url / formatRemoved value: -"uri"Input schema / properties / url / minLengthAdded value: +1v0.3.12Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true. The description adds a useful compatibility nuance ('preserving the url field'), but does not disclose return format, pagination, rate limits, or max_length behavior. With annotations covering safety, this is adequate but not rich.
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 concise sentences with no filler. The primary action is front-loaded, and the compatibility note is brief and purposeful.
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?
Gives the resource and input modes clearly, but with no output schema it omits return format details and the effect of max_length. Sufficient for a simple read tool, but not fully complete for an agent expecting to consume the result.
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 covers the url parameter with HN/Algolia/query examples, and the description adds the compatibility rationale. However, max_length has no schema description and is not mentioned in the description, leaving a required behavior (truncation/limit) undocumented. With 50% schema coverage, the description does not fully compensate.
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 ('Extract'), resource ('Hacker News'), and scope ('top stories or search results'). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling extract_* tools by source and content type, with no tautology.
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?
Implies usage for Hacker News data via 'Accepts an HN/Algolia URL or a plain search query', but does not explicitly state when to prefer this over siblings or provide exclusions/alternatives. Context is understandable but routing is left to inference.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.