Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Twitter241 MCP Server

Twitter241 MCP Server

by BACH-AI-Tools
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Remote

search_lists

Search Twitter lists by keyword to discover curated collections of accounts and relevant communities.

Instructions

Search lists

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": {
      "query": "<query>"
    },
    "name": "search_lists"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
queryYesExample value: football

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv2.0.0

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. The two-word description discloses no behavior, such as what is searched, how results are returned, or any side effects. This is a significant lack of transparency.

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 concise but under-specified. It essentially restates the tool name and provides no additional information. This is not effective conciseness but rather minimalism that sacrifices clarity.

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?

This is a simple tool with one parameter and no output schema, but the description fails to explain what a list is, what the search returns, or any constraints. The sibling tools provide some context, but the description is inadequate on its own.

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 input schema has 100% coverage for the single 'query' parameter with an example value, so the baseline is 3. The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, but it does not need to compensate given the high schema coverage.

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 'Search lists' clearly states the action 'search' and the resource 'lists', which distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_list_details or search_twitter. However, it is minimal and does not specify what type of lists or any search parameters beyond the schema.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention any context, exclusions, or alternative tools, leaving the agent without clear direction on selection.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools