twitter_user_tweets

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false. The description adds behavioral context: it 'excludes replies and retweets', 'returns tweet text, id, timestamp, and engagement metrics', and 'Paginate with cursor'. This goes beyond annotations to clarify what data is returned and how pagination works.

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?

The description is three sentences with no wasted words. First sentence states purpose and output. Second sentence explains pagination. Third sentence gives usage guidance and alternatives. Front-loaded and efficient.

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?

Given 4 parameters fully described in schema and no output schema, the description covers: what the tool does, what it excludes, what data it returns, pagination mechanism, and when to use sibling tools. This is complete for a read-only list tool with many siblings.

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 parameters are already documented. The description adds no new semantic meaning beyond the schema; it only reinforces the pagination behavior. Baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 'Get a user's recent original tweets, excluding replies and retweets.' It specifies the verb (Get), resource (user's original tweets), and filters (no replies/retweets). It also explicitly contrasts with sibling tools twitter_user_tweets_and_replies and twitter_user_tweets_complete, making the purpose distinct.

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 explicitly says 'Use this to analyse a user's own content' and provides alternatives: 'For replies too, use twitter_user_tweets_and_replies; for the full back-catalogue in one call, use twitter_user_tweets_complete.' It also explains pagination with cursor. This gives clear when-to-use and when-not-to-use guidance.

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