Twitter Api45 MCP Server

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 but fails to explain what 'top' ranking is based on (engagement, likes, etc.), pagination behavior beyond the cursor parameter's existence, or whether the search is case-sensitive.

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 a single sentence with no filler content. While the phrasing 'post order top' is grammatically awkward, every word attempts to convey functional scope, achieving brevity without redundancy.

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?

For a search tool with 2 parameters and no output schema or annotations, the description is insufficient. It omits expected details such as the ranking algorithm for 'top' posts, maximum result limits, and the structure of returned data.

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 input schema has 100% description coverage (query and cursor both documented), establishing a baseline score of 3. The description mentions 'top' ordering, which adds semantic context to the search results, but provides no additional syntax guidance, format examples, or pagination logic beyond the schema's example values.

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 states the basic action (search) and resource (posts in communities) but uses awkward phrasing ('post order top') that reduces clarity. It implicitly distinguishes from the 'latest' sibling by mentioning 'top', but the non-standard grammar makes the scope ambiguous.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus the sibling 'communities_posts_search_latest' or general search tools. The description lacks prerequisites, rate limit warnings, or criteria for 'top' ordering.

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