x-twitter

Advanced Search

get_base_apitools_search

Advanced Search Group: Search. Billing per call: 1 Credits.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`to`	No	To these accounts (Example: @Twitter �� sent in reply to @Twitter)
`any`	No	Any of these words (Example: cats dogs �� contains either ��cats�� or ��dogs�� (or both))
`tag`	No	These hashtags (Example: #ThrowbackThursday �� contains the hashtag #ThrowbackThursday)
`from`	No	From these accounts (Example: @Twitter �� sent from @Twitter)
`none`	No	None of these words (Example: cats dogs �� does not contain ��cats�� and does not contain ��dogs��)
`count`	No	result count
`likes`	No	Minimum likes (Example: 280 �� Tweets with at least 280 likes))
`since`	No	start time (Example: 2020-01-01 )
`until`	No	end time (Example: 2021-02-02)
`words`	No
`cursor`	No	cursor (Example: AACCgACF91iNpzAJxAKAAMX3WI2nL-x4AgABAAAAA )
`phrase`	No	This exact phrase (Example: happy hour �� contains the exact phrase ��happy hour��)
`product`	No	product type (Top Latest People Media Lists)
`replies`	No	Minimum replies (Example: 280 �� Tweets with at least 280 replies)
`proxyUrl`	No
`retweets`	No	Minimum retweets (Example: 280 �� Tweets with at least 280 likes)
`resFormat`	No
`mentioning`	No	Mentioning these accounts (Example: @SFBART @Caltrain �� mentions @SFBART or mentions @Caltrain)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.

First observedAug 19, 2026

TDQS

D1.4/5.0

Behavior1/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It fails to mention that this is a search operation (read-only), what data it returns, whether authentication is required, or any side effects. The billing note is trivial and does not cover safety or operational behavior.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness2/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

While the description is short, it is under-specified rather than concise. The only content beyond the title is a billing note, which is unhelpful for an agent. It does not front-load key information like what the search does or its scope.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness1/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

The tool has 18 parameters and no output schema, yet the description provides almost no context. It does not explain what the search returns, how parameters relate, or any operational details. This is completely inadequate for an agent to effectively use the tool.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The input schema has 83% parameter description coverage, so the schema carries most semantic weight. The description adds no parameter explanations, but the high coverage satisfies the baseline for this dimension. No extra value beyond the schema is provided.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose1/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description 'Advanced Search Group: Search' merely restates the tool's title ('Advanced Search') and generic verb 'Search' without specifying what entity is being searched (e.g., tweets, users, media). It provides no differentiation from other search-related sibling tools like get_base_apitools_searchBox or get_base_apitools_userTimeline, making it a tautology.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines1/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description offers no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It lacks any mention of use cases, prerequisites, or exclusions. The only added information is billing ('1 Credits'), which does not aid in tool selection.

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

All x-twitter tools Inspect

Try in Browser

RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

D1.4/5.0

Disambiguation1/5

The set is full of confusing variants such as get_/post_ prefixed duplicates of the same endpoints, competing V1/V2 versions of the same action (e.g., followersList vs. followersListV2), and poorly described tools like CommunitiesSearchV2 and getCt0 that give no clear unique purpose. Agents would frequently need to guess between similar tools for a single task.

Naming Consistency1/5

Naming is chaotic, mixing camelCase (getDMS, likeV2), PascalCase (CreateNoteTweet, CommunitiesMemberV2), and inconsistent prefixes (gettools_*, get_*, post_*) with duplicated operations. The 'get_/post_' prefixes appear to indicate API method rather than action, but they are applied inconsistently, with some tools appearing under both and others only once. There is no predictable verb_noun pattern throughout.

Tool Count1/5

With 107 tools, the server is extremely large, far exceeding the 50+ threshold for extreme mismatch, and this count is inflated by duplicates (many get_/post_ twins) and overlapping V1/V2 variants. Even the unique tool set is likely around 60-70, which is still an unwieldy surface for an agent to negotiate. This severely disrupts coherence.

Completeness3/5

The tool set covers most core Twitter/X domains: tweets, likes, retweets, follows, DMs, search, communities, lists, and profile management. However, it is cluttered with duplicates and lacks some obvious pieces like mute/unmute operations or a direct 'update tweet' action, and several tools appear to be thin wrapper variations of the same endpoint. Coverage is broad but not cleanly organized.

Resources

Need Help?