Recent search

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, and the description adds useful behavioral context beyond them: it is billed per matching post and should not be run in unbounded loops. This is valuable operational/cost information the structured annotations do not convey. No contradiction with 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?

Three short sentences with zero fluff. The first sentence front-loads the endpoint and time window, while the second and third add essential constraints on query ownership and cost.

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 gives enough for a simple query call, including the last-7-days window and cost warning. However, with no output schema and low parameter documentation, it leaves gaps around default result counts, date/time format expectations, pagination behavior, and what response shape to expect.

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 only 14%, so the description should compensate for the 7 parameters. It only clarifies the query parameter ('must be the user's'), and says nothing about end_time, start_time, since_id, until_id, max_results, or pagination behavior beyond the schema's own pagination_token note. The low coverage burden is not met.

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?

Description states a specific resource (GET /2/tweets/search/recent) with a clear time scope (last 7 days), and distinguishes it from sibling x_organic_search_users by implying post search rather than user search. 'Query must be the user's' adds a precise scoping constraint.

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?

It explicitly says the query must be the user's and warns against unbounded brand-watch loops, which tells the agent when this tool is appropriate versus when it should be avoided. It doesn't name alternatives like x_organic_search_users, but the endpoint and 'recent' scope make the intended use fairly clear.

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