get-quoted-tweets

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits, but it only states the basic purpose. Important aspects like pagination behavior, rate limits, or authorization requirements are not mentioned.

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 sentence with no unnecessary words, achieving maximum conciseness while clearly stating the tool's purpose.

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 no output schema and the presence of many sibling tools, the description is incomplete. It does not explain the return format or how the tool fits into the broader workflow, which would help an agent decide to use it.

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 description does not need to add much. However, it adds no new meaning beyond the schema; for example, it doesn't clarify that 'tweetId' must be a numeric string or that 'maxResults' may have an API-enforced limit.

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's function: 'Get tweets that quote a specific tweet'. It uses a specific verb and resource, and easily distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'quote-a-tweet' (which creates a quote) and 'get-tweets' (which retrieves tweets by other criteria).

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?

No guidelines are provided about when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as 'get-tweets' or 'advanced-tweet'. The description lacks any context for when an agent should choose this tool over siblings.

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