Twitter241 MCP Server

get_user_replies_v2

Retrieve replies posted by a specified Twitter user using their user ID and count. Supports cursor-based pagination to load more replies.

Instructions

Get User Replies By ID You can get the user(rest_id) query from \

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": {
      "user": "<user>",
      "count": "<count>"
    },
    "name": "get_user_replies_v2"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`user`	Yes	Example value: 2455740283
`count`	Yes	Example value: 20
`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, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure, but it provides no information about pagination, rate limits, response shape, or ordering. The only extra detail is a truncated hint about the user ID source, which is not behavioral.

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

Conciseness2/5

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

The description is extremely short, but it is under-specified rather than concise. The trailing sentence appears truncated ('from "'), making it feel broken and unpolished.

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

Completeness2/5

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

Without an output schema or annotations, the description should explain what the tool returns (e.g., list of reply tweet objects) and any relevant filtering or pagination. It does neither, leaving the tool underspecified for an agent.

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?

The schema already covers all 3 parameters at 100% coverage, so the baseline is 3. The description adds minor context by indicating the 'user' parameter is a rest_id, but the hint is incomplete and adds little beyond the schema's example value.

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 identifies the verb 'Get' and resource 'User Replies' with a 'By ID' qualifier, making the basic purpose understandable. However, it doesn't distinguish this v2 tool from its sibling 'get_user_replies' and the trailing hint is cut off.

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 about when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_user_replies or get_user_tweets. The description gives no context about appropriate use cases or scheduling.

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

Deploy Server