Twitter241 MCP Server

get_users_by_ids_v2

Retrieve Twitter user profiles by providing multiple user IDs. Input comma-separated IDs to get detailed user data.

Instructions

Get Users By IDs V2

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": {
      "users": "<users>"
    },
    "name": "get_users_by_ids_v2"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`users`	Yes	Example value: 1222790936679206913,133938408,34186021

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv2.0.0Aug 9, 2026

TDQS

D1.4/5.0

Behavior1/5

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

No annotations are present, and the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It says nothing about what the tool returns, whether it is a read operation, any required permissions, rate limits, or other side effects.

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. It merely repeats the tool name and provides no useful information, which is not appropriate for a tool description.

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?

Given the simple one-parameter schema and no output schema, a description could easily explain that this tool fetches user details by comma-separated IDs. The provided description is completely inadequate, offering no functional context or relationship to sibling tools.

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 has one required parameter 'users' with a description providing example values, achieving 100% schema description coverage. The tool description adds no additional semantic meaning, but the high coverage warrants the baseline score of 3.

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

Purpose1/5

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

The description 'Get Users By IDs V2' is a tautology, restating the tool name without adding any specific verb, resource, or behavior. It does not distinguish from the sibling tool 'get_users_by_ids', leaving the v2 suffix unexplained.

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

Usage Guidelines1/5

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 versus alternatives such as 'get_users_by_ids'. No context about suitable scenarios, limitations, or exclusions is provided.

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

Deploy Server