AIsa X / Twitter

Search Users

get_twitter_user_search

Read-onlyIdempotent

Search X user accounts by keyword and get back matching profiles. Use this when you know roughly who you are looking for — a company name, a topic, a partial handle — but not the exact @handle. Cursor-paginated; returns full user objects under users. This searches accounts, not posts; to search tweet content use get_twitter_tweet_advanced_search.

Usage-based billing; Default request estimate: $0.0036 USD (not a fixed price). Account-specific pricing and final settlement may differ.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "query": "<query>"
    },
    "name": "get_twitter_user_search"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`query`	Yes	The keyword to search.
`cursor`	No	The cursor to paginate through the results. First page is empty.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedNov 1, 2026
- changedInput schema / required
```
Previous value: -[]New value: +[
+  "query"
+]
```

Changed2 schema fields changedOct 19, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / cursor

Added value: +{
+  "description": "The cursor to paginate through the results. First page is empty.",
+  "type": "string"
+}

addedInput schema / properties / query / description
```
Added value: +"The keyword to search."
```

Changed3 schema fields changedOct 15, 2026

removedInput schema / properties / cursor

Removed value: -{
-  "description": "The cursor to paginate through the results. First page is empty.",
-  "type": "string"
-}

removedInput schema / properties / query / description
```
Removed value: -"The keyword to search."
```

changedInput schema / required

Previous value: -[
-  "query"
-]New value: +[]

First observedSep 15, 2026

TDQS

A4.4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, open-world, non-destructive behavior, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuinely useful operational context beyond them: cursor pagination and that results come back as full user objects under `users`, plus a billing estimate. It stops short of describing rate limits or result caps, which keeps it off a 5.

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

Conciseness4/5

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

The first two sentences are front-loaded and earn their place by covering purpose, usage trigger, and sibling routing. The response-shape sentence is efficient. The pricing boilerplate block is extraneous to tool selection and slightly dilutes the front-loading, though it is clearly demarcated.

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

Completeness5/5

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

An output schema exists, so return values need not be enumerated, and annotations cover the safety profile. With only two required-ish params, a described pagination model, and an explicit disambiguation from tweet search, an agent has everything needed to call this correctly on the first attempt.

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%, including the non-obvious detail that the first page's cursor is empty, so the schema carries the parameter burden. The description reinforces the cursor-paginated nature but adds no new syntax or constraint beyond that. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 names a specific verb and resource ("Search X user accounts by keyword") and states the result shape ("matching profiles"). It explicitly separates itself from both exact-handle lookup and tweet-content search, so an agent can distinguish it from the ~35 siblings without opening a schema.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

It gives an explicit use condition — fuzzy knowledge of a company name, topic, or partial handle but not the exact @handle — and names the alternative tool for the adjacent case ("to search tweet content use get_twitter_tweet_advanced_search"). Both the when and the when-not are present.

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

All AIsa X / Twitter tools Inspect

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

Need Help?