search_community_tweet

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It mentions pagination and cursor usage, but does not address authentication needs, rate limits, community existence requirements, or error handling. This is minimal but not misleading.

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 concise, opening with a clear purpose statement and then listing parameters in a structured format. Every sentence is informative with no redundancy or unnecessary words.

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?

Although an output schema exists, the description does not reference it or explain return values. Pagination is covered, but missing context like auth requirements, error responses, or community validation. For a tool with 4 parameters, it is somewhat incomplete.

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 0%, so the description must add meaning beyond the input schema. It explains each parameter's role briefly, adds default and max for 'count', and clarifies 'cursor' usage. This adds significant value, though descriptions are concise.

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 purpose: search tweets within a Twitter Community with pagination. It uses a specific verb-resource pair ('Search tweets within a Twitter Community') that distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'search_tweets' (general tweet search) and 'search_community' (search for communities, not tweets).

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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus its siblings (e.g., search_tweets, search_community). It does not mention conditions or alternatives, leaving the agent to infer usage solely from the name and purpose.

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