Writing
Writing card titles and descriptions
X documents 70 characters for card titles and 200 for descriptions. How those limits play out in the current layout, and how to write text that survives truncation.
Short answer
Keep card titles under 70 characters with the key words first, because X lays the title over the image in one short line; keep descriptions under 200 characters and write them for LinkedIn, Slack and Discord, which show them, since X's large image cards usually do not.
Key takeaways
- X documents a 70-character maximum for titles and 200 for descriptions.
- On large image cards the title overlay is short; the first 40 or so characters do the work.
- Descriptions matter more on other platforms than on X today.
- Leave the site name out of og:title; og:site_name and the domain already carry it.
The image gets attention, but the title is what tells people whether the link is worth their time. Card text has its own constraints, different from search titles, and they are worth writing for on purpose.
How long can a card title be?
X documents a maximum of 70 characters for twitter:title and 200 for twitter:description. The same limits apply when X falls back to og:title and og:description. Text beyond them is cut.
In the current large image layout, the practical limit for the title is shorter. Since early 2024 X has shown the headline as an overlay on the lower part of the image, and on a phone that overlay fits only a few dozen characters before it truncates. So the useful rule is: everything important in the first 40 characters, the whole title under 70.
| Field | Documented max | Practical target | Shown on X large cards |
|---|---|---|---|
| Title | 70 characters | 40 to 60, key words first | Yes, as an overlay |
| Description | 200 characters | 100 to 160 | Usually not |
| Image alt | 420 characters | One or two sentences | Read by screen readers |
How do I write a title that survives truncation?
Lead with the specific thing, and cut words that do not carry meaning.
| Instead of | Try |
|---|---|
| "The Ultimate Guide to Everything You Need to Know About Sourdough" | "Sourdough starter: a 7-day schedule" |
| "Announcing Our Exciting New Feature for Teams" | "Shared folders are here for team plans" |
| "Blog | Example Co | How We Reduced Costs" | "How we cut hosting costs by a third" |
| "Q3 Update" | "Q3: revenue up, churn down, two hires" |
Some patterns that hold up:
- Put the noun first. "Sourdough starter: ..." tells people the topic even if the rest is cut.
- Use numbers you actually have. "Cut hosting costs by a third" is concrete; invented precision is not.
- Drop the brand. The domain sits under the card. Apple's guidance for Messages makes the same point: keep the site name out of
og:titleand useog:site_nameinstead. - Avoid all caps and clickbait. Cards from many sites appear in the same feed; a calm, specific title reads as more credible.
Does the description still matter?
Yes, just less on X than elsewhere. On X's large image cards the description is typically not displayed. On summary cards it may appear beside the thumbnail. But Slack, Discord, LinkedIn, Facebook and many chat apps show it, and it is often the only extra context a reader gets in those places.
A good description completes the title instead of repeating it. If the title is "How we cut hosting costs by a third", the description might be "We moved static assets to a CDN, right-sized two databases and dropped an unused region. Numbers and the scripts we used." That is 140 characters and says exactly what the page holds.
Should card text differ from the SEO title and meta description?
Often, slightly. Search titles are written for a results page, with the brand at the end and keywords placed for ranking. Card titles are read in a feed next to someone's post. A common setup:
<title>: "How we cut hosting costs by a third | Example Co"og:title: "How we cut hosting costs by a third"<meta name="description">andog:description: the same 140 to 160 character summary
Use separate twitter:title or twitter:description only when you want X to show something different, for example a shorter title because the og: one is long. The twitter: vs og: guide explains the fallback.
Checking your text
The card generator counts title, description and alt text against X's limits as you type and draws the card at desktop and phone widths, so you can see where the overlay cuts off. For pages that already exist, paste the head into the inspector: it reports each field's length and which tag it came from.
Last check: read the title aloud with the image covered. If it still tells you what the page is about, it will work as a card.
Questions
Should the card title match the page title?
It can, but it does not have to. The HTML title often ends with your brand for search results; the card title reads better without it, since the domain appears under the card anyway.
Do emoji count against the limit?
The documented limits are in characters. Emoji take more space visually and render differently across platforms, so use them sparingly in titles.
What if my description is empty?
X's large image card will look the same, but Slack, Discord and LinkedIn will show less, and some will fall back to the page's meta description or nothing. Always write one.
Can the post text replace a good card title?
On X the post text sits right above the card, so it can carry context. But the card title travels with every share, including ones other people write, so it should stand on its own.