Skip to main content
Glama
RajGehlot28

@twitterapis/mcp

by RajGehlot28
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Remote

twitter_user_following_v2

Read-only

Retrieve the accounts a user follows with richer v2 profile data and stable pagination. Use for deep following lists or when you need the full v2 payload.

Instructions

List the accounts a user follows using the v2 response shape (richer profile fields and more reliable cursoring). Same inputs as twitter_user_following; prefer this when you need the fuller v2 payload or are paging deep following 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

A4.4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already cover the safety profile (readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, openWorldHint=true), so the description's job is to add behavior beyond that. It does: it discloses that cursoring is 'more reliable' and profile fields are 'richer,' which is real behavioral context for choosing between the two variants. It stops short of auth requirements, rate limits, or pagination freshness limits, so not a full 5.

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 tightly written sentences with zero waste; the v2 response-shape distinction is front-loaded before the preference guidance. Every clause earns its place.

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 read-only list tool with a fully documented schema and annotations covering safety, the description supplies what's needed to pick this over its v1 sibling. Since no output schema exists, it partially compensates by noting 'richer profile fields,' though it doesn't enumerate them. Adequate overall.

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 the schema already documents count, cursor, user_id, and username in detail. The description adds nothing parameter-specific beyond 'same inputs as twitter_user_following,' so the 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 a user follows') and explicitly differentiates itself from the sibling twitter_user_following by naming it and explaining the v2 payload differences. An agent can distinguish this from twitter_user_following, twitter_user_followers_v2, and twitter_user_followers without opening any schema.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

Names the alternative ('Same inputs as twitter_user_following') and gives explicit selection conditions: 'prefer this when you need the fuller v2 payload or are paging deep following lists.' The when-to-use and the alternative tool are both spelled out.

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