Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Agent Twitter Client MCP

Agent Twitter Client MCP

by ryanmac
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

like_tweet

Like a tweet on Twitter using its ID, enabling AI agents to interact with content through the Agent Twitter Client MCP server.

Instructions

Like a tweet

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": {
      "id": "<id>"
    },
    "name": "like_tweet"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYesTweet ID to like

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

C2/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

The description discloses that the tool performs a 'like' action (a write operation), but with no annotations, it fails to mention authentication needs, idempotency, side effects, or errors.

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

Conciseness3/5

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

The description is a single sentence, but it is too brief; it could include more information without losing conciseness.

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

Completeness2/5

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

For a simple one-parameter tool with no output schema or annotations, the description lacks sufficient completeness, e.g., whether liking is idempotent or requires specific permissions.

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

Parameters3/5

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

The schema covers the only parameter (id) with a description, and the tool description adds no extra meaning. Baseline of 3 is appropriate given 100% schema coverage.

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

Purpose1/5

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

Description 'Like a tweet' is a tautology of the tool name 'like_tweet', restating the same verb and resource without adding clarity or differentiation from sibling tools.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like retweet or quote_tweet, nor any exclusions or context.

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