Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Agent Twitter Client MCP

Agent Twitter Client MCP

by ryanmac
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

send_tweet_with_poll

Post tweets with interactive polls to gather audience feedback or opinions through Twitter, enabling engagement and data collection from followers.

Instructions

Post a tweet with a poll

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": {
      "text": "<text>",
      "poll": "<poll>"
    },
    "name": "send_tweet_with_poll"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
textYesTweet content (max 280 characters)
replyToTweetIdNoID of tweet to reply to (optional)
pollYesPoll configuration

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

C2.9/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, and the description does not disclose behavioral traits such as authentication requirements, rate limits, side effects, or limitations. It only repeats the basic function without adding depth.

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

Conciseness4/5

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

The description is a single, concise sentence. It is front-loaded and efficient, though it could be slightly more informative without becoming verbose.

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?

Given the absence of an output schema, the complexity of the nested poll object, and the lack of behavioral information, the description is insufficient for an agent to fully understand the tool's behavior and return value. Important context is missing.

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 input schema has 100% description coverage for all parameters. The description does not add any additional meaning beyond what the schema already provides. Thus, baseline 3 is appropriate.

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

Purpose4/5

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

The description clearly states the action 'Post a tweet' and the distinguishing feature 'with a poll'. It is specific about the resource and action, but does not explicitly contrast with the sibling tool 'send_tweet' which lacks a poll.

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 given on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'send_tweet' or 'quote_tweet'. There are no explicit conditions, prerequisites, or exclusions mentioned.

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