Open a specific tweet using its full URL in Twitter/X, enabling AI assistants to control Twitter/X for tweet-based tasks.
Navigate to a specific tweet by URL.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| tweetUrl | Yes | Full URL of the tweet (e.g., https://x.com/user/status/123) |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.2Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It says 'navigate', implying a browser state change, but does not disclose side effects, whether the current page is replaced, whether login or extension availability is required, or what happens on invalid URLs.
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 concise sentence with no filler. It is front-loaded with the action and target, making it easy to parse quickly.
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?
This is a simple one-parameter navigation tool, and the schema fully documents the parameter. However, with no annotations and no output schema, the description still omits behavioral context such as what navigation does to the current page or any relevant prerequisites, leaving it minimally adequate.
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 100%, and the schema already documents tweetUrl fully with an example. The description adds only the phrase 'by URL', which does not add meaning beyond the schema, so the baseline 3 is appropriate.
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 states a specific verb and resource: 'Navigate to a specific tweet by URL.' The resource 'tweet' clearly distinguishes it from sibling navigation tools such as navigate_to_search, navigate_to_bookmarks, and return_to_timeline, so an agent can identify its role without opening the schema.
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 does not state when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it mention prerequisites or exclusions. It implies usage only through 'by URL', but provides no explicit guidance on choosing it over related navigation tools.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.