x-post-retweetersList users who retweeted a specific X (Twitter) post, then pass the cursor to page through more retweeters.
List users who retweeted an X (Twitter) post. Pass cursor to page through more users.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| id | Yes | The ID of the post to get retweeters for. | |
| cursor | No | Cursor for pagination from a previous response. |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.2Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the pagination/cursor behavior, but says nothing about auth requirements, rate limits, or result completeness for a public X endpoint.
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?
Two short sentences, zero filler, and the core action is front-loaded ahead of the paging hint.
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?
A simple two-parameter read tool; annotations carry the safety profile and the schema documents both params. There is no output schema, so the return shape is not explained, but nothing essential for a correct call is missing.
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% and both parameters are fully documented in the schema, so the baseline is 3. The description restates cursor's purpose (paging) without adding syntax or format detail beyond the schema.
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?
States a specific verb and resource: 'List users who retweeted an X (Twitter) post.' The resource is precise enough to separate it from siblings like x-post-replies or x-posts-by-user, though no sibling is named explicitly.
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?
'Pass cursor to page through more users' gives operational guidance for the pagination parameter, but there is no statement of when to use this tool versus the other X-post tools (e.g., replies, by-id). Usage is implied by the resource name rather than stated.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.