Get My Timeline

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, indicating a safe read operation. The description adds useful behavioral context by specifying reverse chronological ordering and that it includes posts from followed accounts, going beyond the annotation baseline. However, it does not cover pagination behavior beyond the schema's limit parameter or return format details.

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 concise, front-loaded sentences with no redundant information. Every word adds value, efficiently conveying the tool's purpose and scope.

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 simplicity, the clear schema for its two optional parameters, and annotations indicating safe read-only behavior, the description is sufficiently complete for an agent to select and invoke the tool correctly. It states the key distinguishing feature (home timeline vs. user posts) and the ordering, which is 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%, so the baseline is 3. The description does not add any additional parameter semantics beyond what the schema provides for 'limit' and 'response_format', so no extra value is added.

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 identifies the tool as retrieving the authenticated user's home timeline in reverse chronological order, with the specific scope of posts from followed accounts. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like x_get_user_posts (which would fetch a specific user's posts) and x_get_my_bookmarks or x_get_my_likes.

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 provides clear context for when to use this tool—whenever the home timeline (aggregated posts from followed accounts) is needed. However, it does not explicitly exclude alternatives or mention when to use other tools like x_get_user_posts for a single user's posts, so it falls short of a 5.

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