Skip to main content
Glama

x-twitter

by com.jojapi

get mentionsTimeline Detail

get_base_apitools_mentionsTimeline

See details https://developer.x.com/en/docs/twitter-api/v1/tweets/timelines/api-reference/get-statuses-mentions_timeline Group: Tweets. Billing per call: 1 Credits.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
ct0No
maxIdNoReturns results with an ID less than (that is, older than) or equal to the specified ID.
sinceIdNoReturns results with an ID greater than (that is, more recent than) the specified ID. There are limits to the number of Tweets which can be accessed through the API. If the limit of Tweets has occured since the since_id, the since_id will be forced to the oldest ID available.
proxyUrlNo
resFormatNo
trim_userNo
auth_tokenNo
include_entitiesNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.

  1. First observed

TDQS

C2.4/5.0
Behavior1/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description must disclose behavior. It only mentions a link and billing, omitting that this is a read operation, whether it requires authentication via ct0/auth_token, or any limits on tweet retrieval. The description adds almost no behavioral detail beyond what the schema itself implies.

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?

The description is brief and to the point, consisting of one sentence with a link. It is not overloaded with fluff, but the link is a placeholder rather than substantive content. It effectively directs to external docs, which is a form of conciseness, but could be more informative in-line.

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

Completeness2/5

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

Given the tool's moderate complexity (8 params, no output schema), the description is insufficient. It fails to define what the tool returns, the purpose of 'mentionsTimeline', or any context for parameters like ct0 and auth_token. The external link provides some depth, but the description alone is not adequate for an agent to use the tool correctly.

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

Parameters3/5

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

Schema coverage is only 25%, with descriptions for maxId and sinceId, but other parameters (ct0, proxyUrl, resFormat, trim_user, auth_token, include_entities) are undocumented. The description does not explain these, so the burden falls on the schema. Since the schema covers a quarter, a 3 is baseline, but the lack of additional context for the remaining 75% is a gap.

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

Purpose3/5

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

The description links to an external API reference and identifies the group as 'Tweets' with a billing cost, but it does not explicitly state what 'mentionsTimeline' does beyond that. A clear statement like 'Retrieves tweets mentioning the authenticated user' is missing. However, the title and link hint at this, giving slight clarity.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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 siblings like homeTimeline or tweetTimeline. The external link assists but is not direct. No mention of prerequisites like authentication, or when to prefer it over similar timeline tools. Thus, minimal usage context.

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

All x-twitter toolsInspect
Try in Browser
RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

D1.4/5.0
Disambiguation1/5

The set is full of confusing variants such as get_/post_ prefixed duplicates of the same endpoints, competing V1/V2 versions of the same action (e.g., followersList vs. followersListV2), and poorly described tools like CommunitiesSearchV2 and getCt0 that give no clear unique purpose. Agents would frequently need to guess between similar tools for a single task.

Naming Consistency1/5

Naming is chaotic, mixing camelCase (getDMS, likeV2), PascalCase (CreateNoteTweet, CommunitiesMemberV2), and inconsistent prefixes (gettools_*, get_*, post_*) with duplicated operations. The 'get_/post_' prefixes appear to indicate API method rather than action, but they are applied inconsistently, with some tools appearing under both and others only once. There is no predictable verb_noun pattern throughout.

Tool Count1/5

With 107 tools, the server is extremely large, far exceeding the 50+ threshold for extreme mismatch, and this count is inflated by duplicates (many get_/post_ twins) and overlapping V1/V2 variants. Even the unique tool set is likely around 60-70, which is still an unwieldy surface for an agent to negotiate. This severely disrupts coherence.

Completeness3/5

The tool set covers most core Twitter/X domains: tweets, likes, retweets, follows, DMs, search, communities, lists, and profile management. However, it is cluttered with duplicates and lacks some obvious pieces like mute/unmute operations or a direct 'update tweet' action, and several tools appear to be thin wrapper variations of the same endpoint. Coverage is broad but not cleanly organized.

Resources