Skip to main content
Glama

Get listing history

get_app_history
Read-onlyIdempotent

Every version of an app's App Store listing we have captured (screenshots and preview videos per date), newest first. Needs Library Pro, $19 a month.

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": {
      "slug": "<slug>"
    },
    "name": "get_app_history"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
slugYesLibrary slug such as instagram.
limitNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already establish read-only, idempotent, non-destructive, closed-world behavior. The description adds useful non-schema context: access requires Library Pro at $19/month, results are newest first, and each version includes screenshots and preview videos by date. It does not discuss pagination or failure modes, but given annotations this is solid.

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 compact sentences, front-loaded with what the tool returns; the pricing prerequisite is relevant rather than padding. No structural issues.

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 two-parameter read-only history tool with no output schema, the description gives the important return shape: every captured listing version, screenshots and preview videos, newest first. It omits how limit affects the result set, so a minor completeness gap remains.

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?

The schema documents slug with an example, while limit is only constrained by default/min/max and lacks semantic description. The tool description does not explain what limit controls, so parameter value beyond the schema is minimal. With 50% coverage and one of two params undocumented, a 3 is appropriate.

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?

States the resource and scope clearly: historical versions of an app's App Store listing, including screenshots and preview videos, ordered newest first. It is more specific than a tautology, though it does not explicitly name sibling tools or clarify current-vs-historical alternatives.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

The pricing/plan prerequisite is explicit ('Needs Library Pro, $19 a month'), but there is no explicit when-to-use/when-not guidance or named alternative such as get_screenshots or get_app_videos. The historical framing implies its use, so this is minimum viable rather than strong routing guidance.

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.