Search apps and games and get short AppAgg summaries with links to full pages.
Scored across 2 tools
The two tools have clearly distinct purposes: one searches by query and returns multiple summaries, while the other retrieves a single specific app by its ID. There is no overlap or ambiguity between them.
Both tools share a consistent appagg_ prefix and follow the verb_noun pattern: get_app_summary and search_apps. Naming is uniform and predictable.
With only two tools, the server feels thin for a general app search service, but it covers the core search-and-retrieve loop. The count is borderline: reasonable for a narrowly focused helper, yet minimal compared to typical servers.
The server covers the essential workflow of searching for apps and then fetching a detailed summary for a specific result. Missing operations like browsing categories or trending apps are minor gaps and do not break the primary use case.
Get a short app or game summary by AppAgg ID with a link to the full AppAgg page.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| appagg_id | Yes |
| Name | Required | Description |
|---|---|---|
| app | Yes |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, openWorldHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds useful behavioral context by stating the result is a 'short' summary and that it includes a link to the full page. No contradiction exists.
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?
One compact sentence that front-loads the core action and includes only necessary details. Every word earns its place.
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?
For a single-parameter, read-only tool with an output schema and safety annotations, the description is nearly sufficient. The main gap is not telling the agent that IDs can be obtained via appagg_search_apps or clarifying the scope of 'short,' but an agent with a valid ID can invoke the tool correctly.
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?
With schema description coverage at 0%, the description needed to clarify the parameter, but it mostly restates the property name: 'AppAgg ID.' It does not explain how to obtain a valid ID or add details beyond the schema's type and range. This is minimally adequate for a single obvious parameter.
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?
The description uses the verb 'Get' and names the resource ('app or game summary'), the required selector ('by AppAgg ID'), and the output detail ('link to the full AppAgg page'). This makes the tool's purpose clear and distinguishes it from the sibling appagg_search_apps tool, which would be used to find apps rather than fetch a summary by ID.
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?
The phrase 'by AppAgg ID' clearly establishes the use case: call this when an AppAgg ID is already known. However, it does not explicitly say when not to use it or mention appagg_search_apps as the way to discover IDs, so it stops short of providing alternatives or exclusions.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
List the best apps and games released in the last 30 days or coming soon as pre-orders (NEW), or currently on sale (DEAL), for a platform, ranked by AppAgg Score, with links to full AppAgg pages. Use it for questions like 'best new Android games' or 'iOS apps on sale today'.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| page | No | ||
| type | Yes | ||
| price | No | any | |
| platform | No | all | |
| min_discount | No |
| Name | Required | Description |
|---|---|---|
| page | Yes | |
| items | Yes | |
| next_page | Yes |
Search AppAgg by app, game, or developer name and return short summaries.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| page | No | ||
| query | Yes |
| Name | Required | Description |
|---|---|---|
| page | Yes | |
| items | Yes | |
| next_page | Yes |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds that results are short summaries, but does not disclose pagination behavior via the page parameter, result limits, or any other operational traits beyond what annotations already convey.
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?
A single, front-loaded sentence that communicates the action, target, query scope, and return type with no filler or redundant restating of the title. It is appropriately sized for the tool's simplicity.
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?
For a low-complexity read-only search tool with an output schema and safety annotations, the description is mostly complete. The main omissions are explicit guidance on when to use this over the sibling tool and any explanation of the pagination parameter, but neither is critical for basic invocation.
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 0%, so the description must compensate. It adds meaning to the 'query' parameter by specifying that it accepts app, game, or developer names. However, the optional 'page' parameter is never explained, leaving pagination semantics undocumented.
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?
The description clearly states a specific action ('Search AppAgg'), the accepted query types ('app, game, or developer name'), and the output ('short summaries'). It is distinct from the sibling appagg_get_app_summary by implying a search flow versus a direct summary lookup, though it does not explicitly call out the sibling.
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?
The description implies the tool should be used when searching for apps/games/developers by name, and that it returns short summaries. However, it gives no explicit when-to-use guidance, no exclusions, and does not mention appagg_get_app_summary as the alternative for retrieving a known app's full summary.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Recent tool additions, removals, and schema changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
appagg_new_and_dealsappagg_get_app_summary2 fields changedOutput schema / $defs / PublicAppCard / properties / appagg_scoreAdded value: +{
+ "description": "AppAgg Score: formatted value and tier.",
+ "title": "Appagg Score",
+ "type": "string"
+}Output schema / $defs / PublicAppCard / requiredPrevious value: -[
- "appagg_id",
- "title",
- "developer",
- "platform",
- "public_url"
-]New value: +[
+ "appagg_id",
+ "title",
+ "developer",
+ "platform",
+ "public_url",
+ "appagg_score"
+]appagg_search_apps2 fields changedOutput schema / $defs / PublicAppCard / properties / appagg_scoreAdded value: +{
+ "description": "AppAgg Score: formatted value and tier.",
+ "title": "Appagg Score",
+ "type": "string"
+}Output schema / $defs / PublicAppCard / requiredPrevious value: -[
- "appagg_id",
- "title",
- "developer",
- "platform",
- "public_url"
-]New value: +[
+ "appagg_id",
+ "title",
+ "developer",
+ "platform",
+ "public_url",
+ "appagg_score"
+]appagg_get_app_summaryappagg_search_apps
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.