Structured, not a headline dump
Every item comes back with its tags attached: the commodity it concerns, drawn from a fixed list of 23 covering staples, cash crops, inputs and fuel; the kind of claim it makes (price level, direction of price, demand or supply, input cost, policy move, production figure, new entrant, product launch, partnership, government programme); and a trust tier, high, medium or low. The tier judges the source. It says nothing about whether the news is good.
Filter on those 3 and you get a usable signal. Ignore them and you get a press review.
How to read the trust tier
A low-trust item is not false. It comes from a source we would not build a decision on by itself. Treat it as something to watch until a high-trust source says the same thing. The tiers let an integration make that distinction automatically; a human skimming headlines rarely does.
Roughly 7 in 10 items carry a national tag instead of a county one. That share describes the press, not a flaw in the tagging: most of what the agriculture press publishes is about the country as a whole.
The feed, and why it is billed differently
The same signals are served as RSS. A reader, an inbox or a chat channel can subscribe without anybody writing an integration. That entry is metered as an ordinary call rather than as an answer, because a feed hands over items it already holds and computes nothing new.
Beside the legal record
Regulatory and legal signals answer the other half of the same question. The press reports what is being said about a subsidy, a levy or a ban; the legal record reports what was gazetted. The 2 do not always arrive together.