Fetch and read news articles, then mark them as consumed to track what you have already seen. Filter by category, feed, or time to get relevant updates.
Read the latest news and mark unread items as consumed.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| limit | No | ||
| category | No | ||
| feedUrls | No | ||
| sinceMinutes | No | ||
| includeConsumed | No |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.1Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full disclosure burden. It does explicitly expose the mutating behavior ('mark unread items as consumed'), which is useful. However, it does not disclose whether consumption is reversible, whether consumed items are hidden by default, what the return format is, or any rate-limit or permission implications.
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?
The description is a single sentence with no filler and the main verbs appear early. It is concise, though bundling 'read' and 'mark' into one clause slightly muddies the structure.
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?
For a state-changing tool with 5 parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, this description is far too incomplete. An agent cannot determine return behavior, default filtering, consumption side effects, or how this tool relates to fetch_news and set_consumption_status.
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 input schema has 5 parameters with 0% description coverage, and the tool description does not explain any of them by name. limit, category, feedUrls, sinceMinutes, and includeConsumed all lack meaningful guidance, leaving the agent to guess their semantics.
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?
The description states a clear action on a resource: 'Read the latest news and mark unread items as consumed.' This distinguishes it from siblings like fetch_news (read-only) or set_consumption_status (status changes only). However, it is slightly ambiguous whether 'read' returns the news content or merely advances consumption state.
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 description implies the tool is for consuming the latest news and marking it as read, which gives some context. But it does not explicitly say when to prefer this over fetch_news or set_consumption_status, nor does it provide exclusions or alternative guidance.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.