twitter_list_timeline

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

Annotations already establish read-only and non-destructive behavior, so the description adds valuable context: native feed semantics, retweet inclusion, inability to honor search operators, and pagination ending when the tweets array is empty. This goes beyond what annotations and schema alone provide.

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?

Every sentence earns its place: purpose, constraint, alternative comparison, and pagination stopping condition are each addressed once. The description is dense but well-organized and free of repetition.

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?

The description is self-sufficient for this tool: it communicates the data scope, ordering behavior, retweet inclusion, endpoint limitations, pagination signal, and the sibling tool to use for alternate needs. With provided annotations and a fully-documented schema, this is a complete picture.

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 the schema already documents list_id, count, and cursor. The description adds helpful high-level information about pagination and the absence of date/reply parameters, but it does not expand on individual parameter syntax, which keeps it at the baseline.

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 opens with a clear verb and direct object: 'Read a public Twitter/X List's NATIVE feed.' It specifies the exact behavior (same posts and ordering as x.com, including retweets) and differentiates itself from twitter_list_tweets.

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?

The description provides explicit decision guidance: use twitter_list_tweets when you need a date range or filtered replies, and accept that the alternative drops retweets. It also clearly states what this endpoint cannot do (no date range, no reply filter).

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