Open an X profile and extract its visible timeline posts. Provide a username and optional limit to control extraction.
Open a profile and extract visible posts from that profile timeline.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| limit | No | Max number of profile posts to extract (1-30). | |
| tabId | No | Optional existing X tab id to reuse instead of opening another tab. | |
| username | Yes | X username without @. |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure, yet it only says it opens a profile and extracts visible posts. It does not state authentication requirements, whether it opens a new tab (beyond the tabId parameter), side effects, rate limits, or that it is a read-only operation.
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, front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. It states the core action directly and efficiently.
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?
For a tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is too sparse. It does not explain return format, error behavior, or how the tool interacts with browser tabs, leaving significant gaps for an agent to infer.
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 schema already documents username, limit, and tabId. The description adds no parameter-specific meaning beyond what the schema provides, making the baseline score of 3 appropriate.
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 states a specific verb and resource: opening a profile and extracting visible posts from its timeline. It is clear and unambiguous, but it does not distinguish itself from siblings like x_extract_profile or x_get_timeline, so it falls short of the top score.
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?
There is no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as x_extract_profile, x_open_profile, or x_get_timeline. The action is described, but no conditions, exclusions, or alternative recommendations are provided.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.