Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

App Store Tracker

by com.appstoretracker
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Get ranking history

get_ranking_history
Read-only

Get one app's top-free chart position per day in one storefront, as ranking_position and created_at points. The chart is the overall chart (category_id 36) when the app holds as many days there as in its own category over the asked span, otherwise its category chart, so a different span can answer from a different chart; category_id in the answer names it. Look back 1 to 3650 days (default 30). Use it for trends and for explaining a move; use get_rankings for a whole chart on one day. Top paid and top grossing history is not collected.

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_id": "<app_id>"
    },
    "name": "get_ranking_history"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
daysNoNumber of days of history (1-3650, default: 30)
app_idYesApp Store ID of the app
countryNoTwo-letter country code (default: "us")us

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

readOnlyHint=true already tells the agent this is a safe read, but the description still adds real behavioral context: the chart-selection rule (overall chart category_id 36 when the app has as many days there as in its own category, otherwise its category chart), the warning that a different span can resolve to a different chart, and the lookback bounds. The remaining gap is that it says nothing about pagination, point ordering, or behavior for apps with no chart presence in the span.

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?

Front-loaded with the core purpose, then constraints, then the sibling alternative and the data-coverage caveat. The chart-selection sentence is long and slightly convoluted, but each sentence carries distinct information with no filler.

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?

No output schema exists, and the description compensates by naming the return shape (ranking_position and created_at points, plus category_id identifying the chart). Combined with the lookback bounds, coverage limits, and sibling routing, an agent has everything needed to call this 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 100%, so all three parameters are already documented, and the description mostly restates them ('Look back 1 to 3650 days (default 30)', 'one storefront'). It does add that country is the storefront scope and that category_id in the response names the chart used, but that is response semantics rather than parameter meaning. Baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Get one app's top-free chart position per day in one storefront') and even names the returned fields, so the agent knows exactly what comes back. It is clearly distinguishable from the sibling get_rankings, which is called out as the whole-chart-on-one-day alternative.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Explicit routing: 'Use it for trends and for explaining a move; use get_rankings for a whole chart on one day.' It also states an exclusion ('Top paid and top grossing history is not collected'), which prevents a futile call rather than leaving the agent to infer coverage.

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

All App Store Tracker toolsInspect
Try in Browser
One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources