Twitter Api45 MCP Server

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. While 'Get' implies read-only safety, the description fails to disclose pagination behavior (despite the cursor parameter), rate limits, or what constitutes a valid list_id format beyond the schema example.

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?

Extremely concise single sentence with no filler words. However, it may be overly terse given the lack of output schema and annotations—additional context would be valuable rather than wasteful.

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?

With no output schema and no annotations, the description should explain return values (user objects), pagination mechanics, and distinguish list followers from list members. It provides none of this context, leaving significant gaps.

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?

Schema description coverage is 100% (both parameters have example values in the schema), establishing a baseline of 3. The description adds no parameter context, leaving the agent to infer that cursor is for pagination solely from the parameter name.

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 a specific action ('Get') and resource ('followers of the list'), distinguishing it from the sibling 'followers' tool (which implies user followers) and 'list_members'. However, it could clarify that 'list' refers to Twitter/X Lists specifically.

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 provided on when to use this versus 'list_members' (members added to a list vs. users following the list), nor when to use the cursor parameter for pagination. No prerequisites or alternatives mentioned.

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