get_tweet

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It discloses that the response includes engagement counts and media, which is useful. However, it omits important details like authentication requirements, error handling, or rate limits, making it minimal but not misleading.

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, front-loaded with the verb 'Fetch', and contains no unnecessary words. Every word earns its place.

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 the tool's low complexity (one parameter) and the presence of an output schema, the description covers the core purpose and return highlights. It lacks details on error cases or usage nuances, but it is adequate for a simple fetch-by-ID operation.

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?

The schema description coverage is 0%, so the description should compensate. It only repeats 'by its id' without adding meaning beyond the parameter name 'tweet_id'. No format, example, or constraints are provided, leaving the parameter semantics under-explained.

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 uses a specific verb 'Fetch' and identifies the exact resource ('a single tweet by its id'). It also adds distinguishing details ('including engagement counts and media') that differentiate it from sibling tools like get_user_tweets or get_home_timeline, which retrieve multiple 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 implies clear usage context: use this when you have a tweet ID and need that specific tweet with engagement and media. However, it does not explicitly exclude alternatives or mention when not to use it, such as retrieving multiple tweets via get_user_tweets or search_tweets.

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