Search X communities by query and return matching community cards and links. Use it to discover relevant X communities for research or outreach.
Search X communities and return community cards/links discovered on the search surface.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| limit | No | Max number of communities to extract (1-20). | |
| query | Yes | Community search query. |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations exist, so the description carries the full behavioral burden, and it discloses little. It implies a read/scrape of a UI 'search surface' but says nothing about session/auth requirements, rate limits, whether results are capped or paginated, or what happens when no communities match.
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?
A single front-loaded sentence with no filler, and the return shape is stated immediately. The trailing phrase 'discovered on the search surface' is slightly vague but not wasteful.
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?
With no annotations and no output schema, the description does add the return format (community cards/links), which is useful. However it omits prerequisites and behavioral limits that an agent needs to call this browser-style search tool correctly, leaving clear gaps.
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%: 'query' and 'limit' (1-20) are both documented in the schema itself. The description adds no query syntax, matching rules, or default-limit behavior beyond what the schema already provides, so the baseline 3 applies.
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?
States a specific verb ('Search') and resource ('X communities'), plus what is returned ('community cards/links'). The resource name implicitly separates it from x_search_posts and x_search_profiles, but the description never explicitly contrasts them, so differentiation relies on the reader inferring from the tool name.
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 when-to-use guidance is given. An agent cannot tell from the text whether this is preferable to x_search_profiles, x_open_search, x_map_community, or x_get_community_feed, nor what preconditions (e.g., an open search surface or active session) must hold.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.