postcopilot_export_followingExport up to 60 accounts that a Threads user follows. 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?
Without annotations, the description discloses the output structure and a limit of 60 accounts, which is helpful. But it fails to mention that the operation is read-only, any authentication requirements, or rate limits, leaving behavioral gaps.
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?
Three sentences effectively convey purpose, output, and usage. No redundant information; front-loaded with key action and resource. Highly concise and well-structured.
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?
For a simple tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description covers the core behavior (what it does, what it returns, limit). Missing details like authentication or error handling, but still fairly complete for straightforward use.
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 coverage is 100% and the description's example provides the same info as the schema's property description. No additional semantic meaning beyond the schema, earning the baseline score.
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?
Description clearly states the tool exports up to 60 accounts a Threads user follows, with specific return fields (username, display name, follower count, verification). It distinguishes from siblings like export_followers (followers vs following) and export_profile.
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?
Provides a clear usage example (profile URL format) and implies when to use (export following list). However, does not explicitly state when not to use or compare to sibling tools, though context from sibling names makes it clear.
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.