Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
mcp-twitterio

mcp-twitterio

by fuhaooo
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Remote

get_user_followers

Retrieve a user's followers list with pagination. Use cursor to fetch subsequent pages, each page returns up to 200 followers.

Instructions

获取用户的粉丝列表

Args:
    userName: 用户名称（screen name）(必需)
    cursor: 用于分页的游标，第一页为空字符串

Returns:
    包含用户粉丝列表的字典，每页返回最多200个粉丝

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "userName": "<userName>"
    },
    "name": "get_user_followers"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
cursorNo
userNameYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A3.9/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Without annotations, the description discloses pagination behavior (max 200 followers per page, empty cursor for first page) and specifies that userName refers to the screen name. However, it does not mention any authentication requirements, rate limits, or error handling, leaving some behavioral uncertainty.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is concise and well-structured with clear Args and Returns sections. It contains no redundant information and is appropriately sized for a two-parameter tool.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

The description covers the core usage and return shape (dictionary with up to 200 followers per page). However, it lacks more detailed output structure, error scenarios, and usage context relative to sibling tools, which would be helpful given the absence of annotations and output schema.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters5/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The description adds significant value beyond the schema by explaining that userName is the screen name and is required, and that cursor is for pagination with an empty string for the first page. This clarifies both parameters meaningfully given the schema provides no property descriptions.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the tool retrieves a user's followers list, and explicitly specifies the parameter 'userName' as the screen name. This distinguishes it from sibling tool get_user_followings, which retrieves the list of users a given user follows.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

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 like get_user_followings. There is no mention of context, prerequisites, or exclusions. The only implicit signal is the tool name.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools