TweetAPI MCP

Official

by tweetapi

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

TypeScript

Hybrid

Get List Followers

tweetapi_list_followers

Read-onlyIdempotent

Fetch one page of accounts that follow a specified Twitter/X list, using a cursor to retrieve additional pages.

Instructions

Fetch one page of the accounts that follow (subscribe to) a list. Use tweetapi_list_members for the accounts in the list. Read-only. Needs a TweetAPI API key and makes one TweetAPI request per call, usually costing 1 unit; each result includes a cost estimate. Returns one page: to get the next one, call again with cursor set to this result's completeness.nextCursor.

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`cursor`	No	completeness.nextCursor from the previous page. Omit it for the first page.
`listId`	Yes	Numeric list ID, or a list link such as https://x.com/i/lists/1234567890.
`responseFormat`	No	full (default) returns TweetAPI's JSON unchanged. compact keeps full post text, IDs, links, original dates, counts, and cursors but drops bulky fields; output.fieldsOmitted lists what was dropped.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description
`cost`	Yes
`mode`	Yes
`tool`	Yes
`notice`	Yes
`output`	Yes
`result`	Yes
`endpoint`	Yes
`usageDocs`	No
`pagination`	No	Pagination exactly as TweetAPI returned it.
`statusCode`	Yes
`retrievedAt`	Yes	When the MCP server received this response (ISO 8601). Not the post or profile date, and not a promise that X's data was fresh at that moment.
`completeness`	Yes
`resolvedInput`	No	Identifiers the MCP server parsed from links or @handles before calling TweetAPI.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedv0.3.3Nov 5, 2026
- addedInput schema / properties / cursor / description
```
Added value: +"completeness.nextCursor from the previous page. Omit it for the first page."
```
Addedv0.2.1Nov 5, 2026

TDQS

A4.6/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Goes well beyond the annotations by disclosing the auth requirement (TweetAPI API key), the request/cost model (one request per call, ~1 unit, cost estimate per result), and the pagination contract. Annotations already cover safety and idempotency, and the description adds the operational context they cannot.

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?

Front-loaded with purpose, then scope disambiguation, then cost, then paging. Dense but nearly every clause carries information; the single paragraph is slightly crowded compared with splitting paging into its own sentence.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

An output schema exists, yet the description still supplies the one piece an agent needs to act on it (where nextCursor comes from). Auth, cost, scope, and paging are all covered for a simple three-parameter read tool.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100% so parameters are already documented, but the description adds meaning the schema lacks: it ties cursor to the output path completeness.nextCursor and explains the paging loop. That is real value above baseline 3.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb and resource (fetch accounts that follow a list) and explicitly frames the inverse relationship with tweetapi_list_members, so an agent can tell the two apart without reading schemas.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Names the sibling tool to use for the opposite set (members) and covers the pagination workflow. It does not address how this differs from the user-level follower tools in the sibling list, which would be the remaining ambiguity.

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

Deploy Server