Skip to main content
Glama

Xcatcher — Recent X Posts

by io.github.lvpiggyqq

Preflight an Xcatcher crawl for free

preflight_crawl
Read-onlyIdempotent

Normalize and deduplicate X handles, validate the mode, and preview the current modeled points/USDC cost. This free read-only check requires no account, creates no quote or task, and moves no funds. Use it before requesting a live x402 payment challenge.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
modeNoAPI-key accounts use 1 point per normal handle and 10 per deep handle; direct x402 normal requests receive progressive batch pricing shown by preflight.normal
usersYesX handles, @handles, or x.com/twitter.com profile URLs.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Schema Changelog

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

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / mode / description
      Previous value: -"normal costs 1 point-equivalent per handle; deep costs 10."New value: +"API-key accounts use 1 point per normal handle and 10 per deep handle; direct x402 normal requests receive progressive batch pricing shown by preflight."
  2. Added

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Beyond annotations (readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false), the description adds concrete side-effect guarantees: 'requires no account', 'creates no quote or task', and 'moves no funds'. It also describes the normalization/deduplication behavior, which is not present in annotations.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Two sentences, each dense with information. The first lists core actions, the second clarifies safety and usage. No redundant or filler content.

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?

Given an output schema exists, return values are already specified. The description covers the tool's purpose, when to use it, and its side-effect profile. For a 2-parameter tool with fully described schemas, this is complete.

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?

The input schema already covers both parameters with detailed descriptions (mode pricing, users formats), and schema coverage is 100%. The description's mention of 'validate the mode' and 'preview cost' aligns with the schema but adds no new semantic detail beyond the parameter descriptions.

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?

The description uses specific verbs ('Normalize and deduplicate', 'validate', 'preview') and names the resource ('X handles' and 'modeled points/USDC cost'). It clearly distinguishes this tool from siblings like get_x402_quote or create_crawl_task by framing it as a preflight check that creates no quote or task.

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?

Explicitly states 'Use it before requesting a live x402 payment challenge', giving clear temporal guidance. Also notes 'requires no account' and 'creates no quote or task', implying when to use this instead of tools that require accounts or create tasks. However, it does not explicitly name alternative tools or state when not to use it.

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

All Xcatcher — Recent X Posts 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

A4.2/5.0
Disambiguation5/5

Every tool has a clearly distinct purpose, with explicit guidance for when to use accountless vs API-key variants. Even closely related tools like get_task_status and wait_for_task are differentiated by their polling behavior, so an agent can reliably select the correct one.

Naming Consistency4/5

Most tools follow a consistent verb_noun pattern in snake_case (create_crawl_task, get_task_status, list_crawl_tasks). The one exception is x402_topup, which places the protocol prefix before the verb, breaking the pattern slightly but still remaining readable.

Tool Count4/5

With 17 tools, the count is slightly above the typical 3-15 range, but the service supports two distinct payment paths (API-key and accountless x402), each requiring a parallel set of status/result tools. The count feels justified by the scope, with no obvious bloat.

Completeness5/5

The tool set covers the full lifecycle of creating, monitoring, retrieving, and managing crawl tasks, including both payment flows. It includes task creation, status polling, result preview/download, cancellation, listing, balance checks, and payment top-ups, leaving no critical gaps for the stated purpose.

Resources