x_organic_my_timelineRetrieve the authenticated user's home feed in reverse chronological order. Use pagination tokens to fetch additional tweets.
GET /2/users/:id/timelines/reverse_chronological for the authenticated user (home feed). Billed per read.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| max_results | No | ||
| pagination_token | No | pagination_token from a previous meta.next_token |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already provide readOnlyHint and openWorldHint, covering the safety profile. The description goes beyond this by adding 'Billed per read,' which discloses a cost implication, and by explicitly noting that the resource belongs to the authenticated user, adding useful auth context not present in the annotations.
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 sentence with no filler. It front-loads the endpoint, immediately states the user scope, and adds the billing note—every word carries meaning. This is exemplary conciseness.
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?
For a straightforward read-only list endpoint, the combination of endpoint path, 'home feed,' and billing note provides enough context to call the tool correctly. There is no output schema, so a more detailed description of the return shape could be helpful, but the 'timeline' semantic and the parameter schema cover the essentials. Minor gaps around response contents prevent a 5.
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 50%: pagination_token has a description in the schema, but max_results has none. The tool description adds no parameter information at all, failing to compensate for the missing max_results semantics. It does not explain that max_results controls the number of returned items or that pagination_token continues a previous response.
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 names the exact endpoint (GET /2/users/:id/timelines/reverse_chronological) and clarifies it serves the authenticated user's home feed. This is a specific verb+resource with clear scope, and it is distinct from sibling tools like user_posts or search_recent, which operate on other data views.
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 phrase 'for the authenticated user (home feed)' implies when the tool should be used, but it does not explicitly mention alternatives or provide exclusion criteria. There is no explicit routing to a sibling tool for other timeline needs, so the guidance remains implicit rather than direct.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.