Twitter241 MCP Server

get_post_comments

Fetch comments for a Twitter post by ID. Specify count and cursor for paginated results.

Instructions

Get Post Comments By Post ID

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": {
      "pid": "<pid>",
      "count": "<count>"
    },
    "name": "get_post_comments"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`pid`	Yes	Example value: 1552735248026411010
`count`	Yes	Example value: 40
`cursor`	No	Example value:

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv2.0.0Aug 9, 2026

TDQS

C2.4/5.0

Behavior1/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states what the tool does, not how it behaves—no mention of pagination via cursor, response format, rate limits, or authentication requirements. This is a critical gap.

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

Conciseness3/5

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

The description is a single short sentence, which is efficient but under-specified for a tool with three parameters and no additional context. It is not verbose, but it fails to include necessary details, making it less than ideal in structure.

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

Completeness1/5

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

The tool has three parameters, no output schema, and no annotations. The description is very brief, leaving unclear what the output looks like, how pagination works, and when to use this over the v2 variant. It is incomplete for an agent to invoke correctly.

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 the baseline is 3. The description adds minimal semantics beyond the schema—it only implies the tool is keyed by Post ID. It does not explain the role of cursor or relationships between parameters, but the schema already documents each parameter.

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 clearly states the action (Get), the resource (Post Comments), and the key parameter (Post ID). It does not distinguish from the sibling tool get_post_comments_v2, so it loses a point for lack of differentiation.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_post_comments_v2. The description lacks any context about selection criteria or exclusions, leaving the agent without directional information.

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

Deploy Server