Skip to main content
Glama
RajGehlot28

@twitterapis/mcp

by RajGehlot28
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Remote

twitter_user_following

Read-only

List the accounts a given Twitter/X user follows to map information sources, influencer networks, or competitor monitoring lists. Returns profile data per account; paginate with cursor.

Instructions

List the accounts that a given user follows. Returns profile data for each account followed. Paginate with cursor. Useful for mapping a user's information sources, influencer networks, or competitor monitoring lists.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
countNoRequested page size, capped at 200. Advisory only for this endpoint: X's own search backend typically returns around 13 to 20 tweets per page regardless of the value requested here, an upstream limit, not something this API controls. To retrieve more results, page with the cursor from the previous response rather than raising this value.
cursorNoOpaque pagination cursor from a previous response's next_cursor field. Omit on the first call; pass on subsequent calls to fetch the next page.
user_idNoNumeric Twitter/X user id (e.g. "44196397"). Provide exactly one of username or user_id.
usernameNoTwitter/X handle WITHOUT the leading @ (e.g. "elonmusk", "openai"). Provide exactly one of username or user_id.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.9.9

TDQS

A3.6/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the pagination behavior ('Paginate with cursor') and the return content, which is useful but limited; it discloses nothing about rate limits or auth requirements.

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

Conciseness4/5

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

Three compact sentences, with the core purpose front-loaded before the use-case list. No filler, though the trailing use-case clause is the least essential part and could be trimmed.

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

Completeness3/5

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

There is no output schema, and the description only loosely characterizes the return ('profile data'), which is adequate. However, given the presence of a v2 sibling and a v1 followers counterpart, the description leaves the agent without guidance on why to pick this tool over those.

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%, so all four parameters (including the quirky advisory cap on 'count' and the exact-one-of username/user_id rule) are already fully documented in the schema. The description's brief 'Paginate with cursor' adds nothing beyond that. Baseline 3 applies.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb and resource ('List the accounts that a given user follows') and immediately says what it returns ('profile data for each account followed'). An agent can distinguish this from twitter_user_followers (which is the inverse direction) directly from the description.

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?

Provides use-case hints ('mapping a user's information sources, influencer networks, or competitor monitoring lists') but no explicit when-to-use rules. Critically, it does not differentiate itself from the near-identical sibling twitter_user_following_v2, nor state the username/user_id exclusivity described only in the schema.

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