Get Tweet Retweets

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

Goes well beyond the annotations (readOnly/idempotent/non-destructive) by disclosing the API-key requirement, that each call makes exactly one TweetAPI request and usually costs about 1 unit, that results carry a cost estimate, and that responses are single pages requiring cursor chaining. That is exactly the operational context an agent needs before calling.

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?

Four tight sentences, front-loaded with the action and scope, then the sibling disambiguation, then cost/auth constraints, then pagination. Every sentence carries distinct, useful information with no repetition.

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?

Return values are covered by the existing output schema, so the description need only handle purpose, prerequisites, cost, and pagination — all of which it does. Nothing an agent needs to call this correctly is missing.

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 coverage is 100%, so all three parameters are already documented in the schema, including the cursor's origin and the full/compact responseFormat trade-off. The description reinforces cursor usage but adds no new syntax or format detail, so the baseline of 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 and resource ('Fetch one page of the accounts that reposted a post'), plus accepted input forms (post ID or post link) and page scope. It is clearly distinguishable from the quote-post sibling, which it names explicitly.

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?

Names the alternative to use for quote posts (tweetapi_tweet_quotes) and the condition that selects it, and states the pagination procedure: call again with cursor set to completeness.nextCursor. There is no ambiguity about which tool handles reposts versus quotes.

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