search_tweets

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the behavioral burden. It states the tool is free and uses specific APIs, but does not disclose rate limits, authentication needs, read-only nature, or what happens on failure. This is minimal for a tool with no annotations.

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 is two sentences with no wasted words. The purpose is front-loaded, and each sentence provides distinct value: purpose and cost/API source.

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 2-parameter tool with no output schema, the description covers the core functionality and cost. However, it lacks return format details and behavioral context like rate limits, leaving some gaps for a fully self-contained definition.

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%, so baseline is 3. The description adds that the query is a 'keyword' and that tweets are 'recent', which provides context beyond the schema but does not elaborate on syntax or count formatting.

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 clearly states the tool searches recent tweets by keyword, with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from siblings like analyze_account (analysis) and generate_tweet (creation) through the verb 'search' and noun 'tweets', though no explicit alternative is named.

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 mentions it's a 'free feature' using free tier APIs, implying cost constraints, and says 'recent' tweets, suggesting it's not for historical search. However, it does not explicitly state when to use versus alternatives or provide exclusions.

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