Skip to main content
Glama

Get app complaint themes

get_app_complaints

Top complaint themes from the app's 1 and 2 star reviews. Subscriber only.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "app": "<app>"
    },
    "name": "get_app_complaints"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
appYesApp Store URL (https://apps.apple.com/.../id123456789), numeric App Store id, or app name

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

B3.3/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden, and it does disclose two useful traits: the data source (1- and 2-star reviews only, so higher-rated reviews are excluded) and the subscription requirement. It says nothing about rate limits, caching/freshness, or what the returned themes look like, so behavioral disclosure is partial.

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 short sentences, no filler, and the core purpose is front-loaded ahead of the access constraint. Every clause earns its place.

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

Completeness3/5

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

For a simple one-parameter read tool this covers the essentials (what it returns in theme terms and the subscriber gate), but with no annotations and no output schema the description should ideally describe the return shape or ordering ('top' implies ranking but the basis is unstated). Adequate but with visible gaps.

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 100% and the schema already explains that the 'app' parameter accepts a store URL, numeric id, or name. The description adds no parameter-level detail, so the baseline 3 is correct for a well-documented single parameter.

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

Purpose4/5

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

The description states the resource precisely: top complaint themes derived from the app's 1- and 2-star reviews, which cleanly contrasts with the category-level sibling. It implies the retrieval verb via "Top complaint themes" rather than naming it, and it doesn't explicitly mention get_category_complaints, so it is clear but not fully sibling-differentiating.

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 only guidance is "Subscriber only," which is an access prerequisite rather than a when-to-use condition. No alternative such as get_category_complaints is named, and there is no statement of when this tool should not be used (e.g., for non-subscribers or category-level analysis). Usage is left to inference from the name.

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

Try in Browser

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources