x-ai-mcp

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the OAuth token requirement, which is a key behavioral trait for authentication. However, it doesn't cover other important aspects like rate limits, pagination behavior, error handling, or the format of returned tweets, leaving gaps in behavioral context.

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 appropriately sized with two sentences: the first states the purpose and auth requirement, and the second explains the parameter. It's front-loaded with the core functionality, though the parameter details could be slightly more integrated, but overall it's efficient with minimal waste.

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?

Given the tool has an output schema (which likely describes the return values), the description doesn't need to explain outputs. It covers the purpose, auth requirement, and parameter semantics adequately for a read-only tool. However, it could benefit from more behavioral details like rate limits or ordering, but the presence of an output schema reduces the burden.

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?

The description adds meaningful context for the single parameter 'count' by explaining it as 'Number of tweets to fetch' and providing a range (1-100) and default (20), which the input schema only lists as a numeric property with a default. Since schema description coverage is 0%, the description fully compensates by detailing the parameter's purpose and constraints.

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 verb ('Get') and resource ('your home timeline — tweets from people you follow'), making the purpose specific and understandable. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'x_user_tweets' or 'x_liked_tweets', which might also retrieve tweets but from different sources.

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 implies usage by specifying 'tweets from people you follow', which suggests it's for viewing a personalized feed. However, it lacks explicit guidance on when to use this versus alternatives like 'x_user_tweets' (for a specific user's tweets) or 'x_search_tweets' (for keyword-based searches), and doesn't mention any exclusions or prerequisites beyond the OAuth token requirement.

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