ime_newsRetrieve recent announcements, weekly trading reports, and new listings from the Iran Mercantile Exchange news archive, including title, lead, date, and link. Returns Persian text.
Latest news and notices from the exchange's news archive: title, lead, date and link.
Use it for announcements, weekly trading reports and new listings. Text is Persian.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| limit | No | Max news items (1-30). |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive and open-world, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuinely useful context (Persian-language text, returned fields), but says nothing about result ordering, recency window, or how the default limit of 10 behaves in practice.
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 short sentences, resource and payload front-loaded, and the Persian-language note is a high-value detail placed where it will be read. Slight redundancy between the purpose statement and the use-case list keeps it from a 5.
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, the description correctly compensates by naming the returned fields, and annotations carry the safety semantics for a one-optional-parameter read tool. What remains thin is routing guidance relative to ime_weekly_reports, the closest sibling.
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?
Only one optional parameter and the schema documents it at 100% coverage with default and bounds, so the schema does the heavy lifting. The description adds no meaning beyond it (e.g., whether limit truncates the newest items first), which is the baseline 3 case.
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 resource (the exchange's news archive) and enumerates the returned fields (title, lead, date, link), so the agent knows exactly what it fetches. It does not, however, distinguish itself from the ime_weekly_reports sibling, which it implicitly claims territory over via 'weekly trading reports'.
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?
Gives positive use cases (announcements, weekly trading reports, new listings) but never says when NOT to use it or names an alternative. The 'weekly trading reports' example actively invites confusion with the ime_weekly_reports sibling tool, with no rule for choosing between them.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.