Skip to main content
Glama

Social Fetch

by io.github.social-freak-ltd
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Check Twitter follow relationship

twitter_friendship_get
Read-only

Check whether one X account follows another, by handles or numeric user ids. Accepts a source and target handle or id.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
byNoTreat source and target as handles or numeric user ids. Defaults to id when a value is all digits.
trimNoIgnored if this tool does not support it.
limitNoIgnored if this tool does not support it.
offsetNoIgnored if this tool does not support it.
sourceYesSource account (the potential follower). Handle without the leading @, or numeric user id.
targetYesTarget account (the potential followee). Handle without the leading @, or numeric user id.
contextYesDescribe the user's underlying goal in one sentence — not the tool you are calling.
pageSizeNoIgnored if this tool does not support it.
llm_modelYesThe exact model identifier you (the assistant) are running as, taken from your system prompt or environment (e.g. "claude-opus-4-8", "gpt-5.2"). Used for analytics only. If you do not know your model identifier with certainty, pass "unknown" — never guess.
maxResultsNoIgnored if this tool does not support it.
max_resultsNoIgnored if this tool does not support it.
conversation_idNoEcho the conversation_id from the server's previous response. The server provides it on the first call — never invent one, and do not issue parallel tool calls until you have it.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed6 schema fields changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / limit
      Added value: +{
+  "anyOf": [
+    {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    {
+      "type": "number"
+    },
+    {
+      "type": "boolean"
+    }
+  ],
+  "description": "Ignored if this tool does not support it."
+}
    • addedInput schema / properties / maxResults
      Added value: +{
+  "anyOf": [
+    {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    {
+      "type": "number"
+    },
+    {
+      "type": "boolean"
+    }
+  ],
+  "description": "Ignored if this tool does not support it."
+}
    • addedInput schema / properties / max_results
      Added value: +{
+  "anyOf": [
+    {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    {
+      "type": "number"
+    },
+    {
+      "type": "boolean"
+    }
+  ],
+  "description": "Ignored if this tool does not support it."
+}
    • addedInput schema / properties / offset
      Added value: +{
+  "anyOf": [
+    {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    {
+      "type": "number"
+    },
+    {
+      "type": "boolean"
+    }
+  ],
+  "description": "Ignored if this tool does not support it."
+}
    • addedInput schema / properties / pageSize
      Added value: +{
+  "anyOf": [
+    {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    {
+      "type": "number"
+    },
+    {
+      "type": "boolean"
+    }
+  ],
+  "description": "Ignored if this tool does not support it."
+}
    • addedInput schema / properties / trim
      Added value: +{
+  "anyOf": [
+    {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    {
+      "type": "number"
+    },
+    {
+      "type": "boolean"
+    }
+  ],
+  "description": "Ignored if this tool does not support it."
+}
  2. Added

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is already established. The description adds the accept-by-handle-or-id behavior, which is useful but marginally beyond what the schema already specifies. It doesn't discuss output shape, error behavior, or rate limits, but for a simple read-only relationship check, the annotations lower the bar and the description meets it adequately.

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

Conciseness5/5

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

Two sentences with no filler. The core action is front-loaded, and the input flexibility is stated immediately after, giving the agent exactly what it needs to route the call.

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

Completeness4/5

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

For a simple pairwise relationship check with readOnlyHint and openWorldHint annotations, the description covers the essential call semantics. The many generic parameters (limit, offset, pageSize, etc.) are self-describing in the schema as 'ignored if not supported,' so their presence doesn't create ambiguity. An output schema is absent, but a yes/no relationship check is understandable from the description alone.

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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so all 12 parameters including source, target, and by are already documented. The description's mention of 'handles or numeric user ids' reinforces the source/target semantics but adds no new technical detail. The baseline of 3 applies because the schema carries the load.

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

Purpose5/5

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

The description states the exact verb and resource: 'Check whether one X account follows another.' It also identifies the two input forms (handles or numeric ids), making the tool's scope immediately clear. This distinguishes it from sibling list-style tools like twitter_profile_followers_list, which return aggregate relationships rather than a pairwise check.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

The description gives clear context for when to use the tool: when the user needs to verify a direct follow relationship between two specific accounts. It doesn't explicitly list alternatives or state when NOT to use it, but the pairwise nature is self-evident against the broad sibling set, so an agent can infer the right call without extra guidance.

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

All Social Fetch toolsInspect
Try in Browser
One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources