twitter_community_search

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, openWorldHint=true, and destructiveHint=false. The description adds valuable behavioral context: cursor-paginated results, compact hit structure with specific fields, and the guarantee that it returns only what X's own search sends. This goes beyond annotations without contradicting them.

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 sentences, front-loaded with the main action, followed by relationship context and response details. No filler words; every clause contributes meaningful information about usage or behavior.

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?

Despite no output schema, the description covers purpose, pagination, response shape, and downstream tool usage. Annotations cover safety, and the tool is simple enough that this description is fully sufficient for an agent to select and invoke it correctly.

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?

Input schema has 100% coverage for both parameters (query and cursor), so the description doesn't need to compensate. The description mentions cursor-paginated but adds no new parameter details beyond the schema. Baseline 3 applies.

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?

The description clearly states the action ('Find X Communities by keyword') and resource (X Communities). It distinguishes itself from sibling community tools by explicitly positioning itself as the discovery step that produces community IDs, which other endpoints consume.

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?

Provides explicit guidance on when to use: as the entry point for the community family, and directs users to specific sibling tools once an ID is obtained. It also implies when not to use it (when you already have an ID, use detail endpoints).

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