twitter_advanced_search

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, openWorldHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description usefully adds that results include tweet text, author info, engagement metrics, and a pagination cursor. It does not mention rate limits or auth needs, so it adds some but not rich behavioral context.

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?

Front-loads purpose, then operators, return values, mode selection, and examples in a tidy progression. The operator enumeration duplicates the schema's query description, so it is slightly padded rather than tightly minimal.

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, the description appropriately explains the return shape (tweet text, author, engagement, cursor). Combined with operator support, mode guidance, and examples, an agent has enough to call it correctly, missing only auth/rate-limit context.

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%, so all four parameters are already documented in-schema, setting a baseline of 3. The description's operator list and product-mode explanation largely restate the schema, though the concrete example queries add marginal construction help.

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: 'Search recent tweets using X's advanced-search operators.' The 'recent tweets' scope and operator-based full-text search distinguish it from siblings like twitter_user_search or twitter_bookmark_search, though it never names them 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?

Offers in-tool guidance on product modes ('Latest' for chronological vs 'Top' for engagement-ranked) and gives example queries, which implies usage. However, it never states when to reach for this tool over sibling search tools or any conditions to avoid it.

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