get_tweet

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

No annotations provided; the description does not disclose behavioral traits such as error handling, rate limits, authentication needs, or what happens if the tweet is not found. The read-only nature is assumed but not stated.

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?

One short sentence with essential information. The parenthetical example fields add clarity without unnecessary length.

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 simple get-by-ID tool, the description gives basic return field hints but is incomplete: it does not mention error responses, full return structure, or authentication. Sibling tools like get_user_tweets have similar complexity, so this is adequate but not thorough.

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 input schema provides 100% description coverage for the single parameter tweet_id. The description adds value by explicitly mentioning the return fields (author, metrics, text), which compensates for the missing output schema.

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 'Get details of a specific tweet by ID' and lists example fields like author, metrics, text. It uses a specific verb and resource, distinguishing it from sibling tools like get_user_tweets or get_mentions.

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?

No explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance. Usage is implied by the straightforward read operation, but excludes alternatives or prerequisites.

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