Apptiller

This connector has been deprecated

Duplicate listing. Apptiller is listed from the official MCP Registry as com.apptiller/apptiller, which includes this public endpoint (https://mcp.apptiller.com/public) and the main connector (https://mcp.apptiller.com/mcp).

Submit a launch for your owner to confirm

submit_launch

Submits an app (its App Store link or id) or a website (its domain, plus a name) to Apptiller Launches for the owner. It is held, not public, until the owner opens the link emailed to them (within 24 hours), signs in or makes an account, and confirms it. Once confirmed it is listed as not verified; it shows as the verified owner's once they prove they own it (an App Store Connect key, or a TXT record on the website's domain), and it is ranked once its RevenueCat (app) or Stripe (website) is connected, by the revenue it adds in its launch period. A product launches once per account, and one proven by its owner can't be launched by anyone else. Launching is free; it makes the product's name, tagline and launch-period numbers public.

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": {
      "email": "<email>",
      "kind": "<kind>",
      "link": "<link>",
      "tagline": "<tagline>",
      "category": "<category>"
    },
    "name": "submit_launch"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`kind`	Yes
`link`	Yes	App Store link or id for an app; domain or URL for a website.
`name`	No	Required for a website; an app's defaults to its App Store name.
`email`	Yes	The owner's email address.
`tagline`	Yes	What it does, in one line.
`category`	Yes
`hide_amounts`	No	Show rank and growth only, never dollar amounts.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedNov 9, 2026

TDQS

A4.4/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations only state that this is a non-read-only, non-idempotent, non-destructive, open-world call; the description adds the entire lifecycle beyond that: held state, 24-hour email window, sign-in requirement, unverified listing, verification via App Store Connect key or DNS TXT record, ranking gated on RevenueCat/Stripe connection, and the fact that name, tagline and launch-period numbers become public. It also discloses cost (free). This is exactly the value-add a description should provide over structured hints.

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?

Dense but front-loaded: the first sentence states the action and inputs, subsequent sentences handle the confirmation flow, verification, ranking and constraints in a logical order. There is no filler, though the single unbroken paragraph of dependent clauses is harder to scan than it needs to be.

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

Completeness4/5

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

For a 7-parameter open-world mutation with no output schema, the description covers preconditions, side effects, and downstream state changes thoroughly. It does not say what a successful call returns (e.g. confirmation id, whether the email was sent) or what failure modes exist for a bad link or duplicate launch, which leaves a small gap given there is no output schema to fill it.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters5/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

No contradictions. The description does not explain hide_amounts, which is the one gap. Schema captures link, name, email, tagline, category semantics at 71% coverage. Description's contribution is mostly the lifecycle, so parameter-layer meaning is largely schema-derived. A 3 is the fair baseline here.

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?

Opens with a specific verb and resource ('Submits an app ... or a website ... to Apptiller Launches for the owner') and even enumerates the accepted identifier forms (App Store link/id, domain plus name). An agent can tell this is a write/submission tool rather than a browse or signup tool. It stops short of naming a sibling as the alternative path, so 5 is not warranted.

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?

Gives the operative constraints an agent needs: the submission is held non-public pending the owner's emailed confirmation within 24 hours, and a product launches once per account while a verified product cannot be launched by anyone else. That effectively tells the agent when this call is valid and when it will be rejected. There is no explicit 'use this instead of X' routing language, so 4 rather than 5.

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

All Apptiller tools Inspect

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

Need Help?