postcopilot_export_followersExport up to 60 followers from a Threads user profile. Returns usernames, display names, follower counts, and verification status. Provide a profile URL like https://www.threads.com/@username.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| url | Yes | The Threads profile URL (e.g. https://www.threads.com/@username) |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description bears the transparency burden. It reveals a limit of 60 followers and the output fields, but does not mention authentication requirements, rate limits, or whether the operation is idempotent. This is adequate but not thorough.
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 consists of two sentences, each serving a clear purpose: first states the action and limit, second lists output fields and gives a URL example. 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 no output schema, the description compensates by listing the returned fields (usernames, display names, follower counts, verification status) and a limit. It lacks details on the response format (e.g., JSON array) and pagination, but for a simple tool with one parameter, this is nearly complete.
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 single parameter 'url' has 100% schema description coverage, so baseline is 3. The description adds an example URL format, but essentially repeats the schema. No additional meaning or constraints beyond the schema are provided.
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 uses a specific verb 'Export' and identifies the resource 'followers from a Threads user profile'. It lists the returned fields, which clarifies the scope. The sibling tool names (e.g., export_following, export_profile) further differentiate functionality.
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 a URL format example but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus its siblings (e.g., export_following or export_profile). Usage context is only implied by the sibling names, offering no clear guidance or exclusions.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Each tool has a clearly distinct purpose: downloading videos, exporting followers/following/profile, generating posts, and reading guides. No overlap or ambiguity.
All tools follow a consistent 'postcopilot_verb_noun' pattern with snake_case, making them predictable and easy to distinguish.
With 6 tools, the server is well-scoped for Threads social media tasks—covering content retrieval, analytics, and creation without being over- or under-sized.
Core workflows (exporting data, generating posts, reading guides) are covered. Minor gaps exist, such as no direct posting or interaction tools, but the surface is coherent for the stated purpose.