Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
x-mcp

x-mcp

by EL4CTEO
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

X trends

x_trends
Read-onlyIdempotent

Fetch trending topics by location using a WOEID or get personalized trends for the authenticated account, with configurable result limits.

Instructions

Trending topics by location (WOEID) and personalised trends for the authenticated account.

Actions (pass "action" plus that action's parameters):

  • by_location: Trending topics for a location identified by WOEID.

  • personalized: Trending topics personalised for the authenticated account (based on follows, location and activity).

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": {
      "action": "<action>"
    },
    "name": "x_trends"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
woeidNoWhere On Earth ID of the location. 1 = worldwide.
actionYesAction to perform. One of: by_location, personalized.
max_trendsNoNumber of results to return (1-50).

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.0.0

TDQS

A3.6/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is fully covered structurally. The description adds one genuinely useful behavioral fact — that personalized trends are derived from follows, location and activity and require authentication — but says nothing about rate limits or data freshness, which matter for a live trends endpoint.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Two framing sentences followed by a compact action list; the action-per-line layout maps directly onto the action enum parameter and nothing is redundant. The reader gets scope and selection options in the first screen of text.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a three-parameter, single-resource read tool with no output schema, the description covers the modes and the authentication requirement for personalized trends, which is the main decision an agent needs. Minor gaps remain around result shape and rate/recency behavior, but nothing essential to a correct call is missing.

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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, with woeid (1 = worldwide) and max_trends (1-50) fully documented inline, so the baseline is 3. The description reinforces the WOEID concept but adds no formatting hints or defaults beyond what the schema already states.

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 names a concrete resource (trending topics) and enumerates the two distinct modes: location-based via WOEID and personalized for the authenticated account. It is unambiguous what the tool returns, though sibling differentiation is only implicit since the other x_* tools cover clearly different domains.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The per-action lines give enough of a signal to pick between by_location and personalized (location known vs. account-based feed), but there is no explicit when-to-use phrasing, no statement of prerequisites such as authentication scope for the personalized action, and no guidance on alternatives.

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