Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
X MCP Server

X MCP Server

by siddheshutd
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

quote-a-tweet

Quote a tweet by providing the tweet ID and your text to create a quote tweet with a reply.

Instructions

Quote a specific 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": {
      "text": "<text>",
      "tweetId": "<tweetId>"
    },
    "name": "quote-a-tweet"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
textYesThe text content of the reply
tweetIdYesThe ID of the tweet to reply to

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.0.0

TDQS

C2.9/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

Without annotations, the description should disclose behavioral traits. It does not mention that quoting a tweet creates a new tweet, whether authentication is required, or any side effects. This is insufficient transparency.

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 extremely concise, using one sentence with no wasted words. However, it sacrifices clarity for brevity, missing some context that could fit in a few more words.

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 tool with two parameters and no output schema or annotations, the description is incomplete. It does not explain the concept of quoting, prerequisites (e.g., tweet existence), or the result of the action.

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?

Schema coverage is 100% with clear descriptions for both parameters. The description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema already provides, so baseline score of 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 'Quote a specific tweet' clearly states the action (quote) and the resource (tweet), distinguishing it from sibling tools like 'post-tweet' or 'retweet'. However, it could be more specific about quoting being a retweet with a comment.

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 'post-tweet'. The description lacks context for choosing this tool over similar ones.

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