home_timeline

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden for behavioral disclosure. It only implies authentication via 'authenticated account' but does not explicitly state the operation is read-only, whether pagination is supported, or what the response contains. This leaves significant behavioral gaps.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence with no filler words. It is concise and directly names the action and resource. However, it is overly minimal, lacking any additional context that could be provided without bloating, so it earns a high but not perfect score.

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 tool has no output schema, no annotations, and only one parameter. The description does not explain the return format, authentication requirements in detail, rate limits, or how the timeline is sorted. For a simple read tool, this is partially adequate but still leaves key gaps, making it incomplete.

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 0%, and the description does not mention the 'count' parameter at all. The schema only provides numeric constraints (min 1, max 100, default 20) but no semantic meaning. The description fails to compensate by explaining how 'count' affects results, leaving the agent to guess.

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 ('Get') and the resource ('the authenticated account's For You home timeline'), which is specific and distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_user_tweets or get_tweet. The phrase 'For You' clarifies it's the algorithmic timeline, not a generic home feed.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention scenarios like retrieving one's own feed versus a specific user's tweets, nor does it reference any sibling tools. No exclusions or prerequisites are stated.

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