get_tweets_by_ids

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It discloses the batch fetch nature, the input format (comma-separated string), and the batch size limit (up to 100 IDs). It does not mention error handling for invalid/deleted tweets but is sufficient for a simple read operation.

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 two sentences: first states purpose, second gives usage guidance. It is concise with no wasted words and front-loads the key information.

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?

Despite no output schema, the description lists the types of data returned (author, text, engagement counts, media). It also covers the batch limit and input format, making the tool's behavior clear and complete for its simplicity.

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 coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds marginal value by repeating the comma-separated format and providing example IDs, but the schema already describes the parameter adequately.

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 the tool fetches full tweet objects by numeric IDs, specifying the exact resource (tweets) and action (batch-fetch). It distinguishes from siblings like search_tweets by emphasizing the use case when specific IDs are already known.

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 explicitly says 'Use this when you already have specific tweet IDs' and gives examples of when this applies. It implies not to use when IDs are not available, but does not name alternative tools like search_tweets explicitly.

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