Skip to main content
Glama

Twitter / X data for agents

twitter_trends

Paid ($0.005). Trends — Twitter / X. Live data as JSON. Pay with x402 or an Authorization: Bearer bby_live_... credits key.

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": {
      "country": "<country>"
    },
    "name": "twitter_trends"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
countryYesRequired.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Added

TDQS

A3.5/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations available, the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It discloses the exact pay-per-call price, the authentication options (x402 or Bearer credits key), and the live JSON response format, which are meaningful operational traits not present elsewhere.

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?

The definition is extremely compact and every phrase carries relevant information: price, platform, live data, output format, and payment methods. The cost is front-loaded, and there is no filler or repetition.

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

Completeness3/5

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

For a one-parameter tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description supplies key operational facts such as cost, auth, and JSON output, but leaves accepted country values and response content to inference. It is minimally adequate but not fully self-contained.

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 coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3 even though the tool description itself adds no parameter detail. However, the schema only says 'country' is required and does not specify accepted country names, codes, or format, and the description does not compensate for that gap.

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

Purpose4/5

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

The description identifies the resource (Twitter/X trends) and states that the output is live JSON, making the purpose inferable even though it lacks an explicit verb like 'get' or 'list'. It is also distinguishable from the sibling tools, none of which target trends specifically.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

There is no guidance on when to use this tool instead of the many twitter_* alternatives, and no exclusions or conditions beyond payment. The description provides cost and authentication details, but those are operational rather than selectional.

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

Try in Browser

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources