HackerNews MCP Server

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It mentions sorting behavior ('sorted by date descending'), which is valuable. However, it doesn't disclose other important behavioral traits like whether this is a read-only operation, potential rate limits, authentication requirements, what happens with invalid parameters, or pagination behavior beyond the parameters themselves.

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, efficient sentence that front-loads the core purpose. Every word earns its place - 'retrieve' (action), 'most recently submitted stories' (resource), 'sorted by date descending' (key behavior). No wasted words or redundant information.

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?

Given that there's an output schema (which handles return values), 100% schema description coverage, and this is a relatively simple read operation with 2 optional parameters, the description is reasonably complete. It covers the core purpose and sorting behavior. The main gap is lack of guidance on when to use versus sibling tools.

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 description coverage is 100%, so both parameters are well-documented in the schema. The description doesn't add any meaningful parameter semantics beyond what the schema provides - it doesn't explain how 'page' and 'hitsPerPage' interact with 'most recently submitted stories' or provide usage examples. Baseline 3 is appropriate when schema does the heavy lifting.

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 clearly states the verb ('retrieve') and resource ('most recently submitted stories'), and specifies the sorting order ('sorted by date descending'). It distinguishes from some siblings like 'get_story' (single story) and 'search_stories' (search functionality), but doesn't explicitly differentiate from 'get_front_page' or 'get_ask_hn' which might also retrieve recent stories.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'get_front_page', 'get_ask_hn', 'search_stories', or 'search_by_date'. It doesn't mention any prerequisites, exclusions, or specific contexts where this tool is preferred over siblings.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.