app_store_versionChecks current App Store version by bundle ID. x402 payment required (testnet USDC).
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| country | No | 国コード(既定us) | |
| payment | No | x402 payment payload (base64 JSON), signed EIP-712 exact/transferWithAuthorization. Omit on the first call — the tool will return payment requirements (accepts[]) as an error result. | |
| maxItems | No | ||
| bundleIds | Yes | App StoreのbundleId配列 |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
The description discloses the unusual payment requirement but doesn't explain that the first call is expected to fail and return payment requirements as an error result. Since annotations are absent, the description carries the full behavioral disclosure burden and only partially meets it.
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?
Two concise sentences with no filler. The core function and the most important constraint (payment) are front-loaded. 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?
The tool's purpose and payment requirement are clear, but the two-step payment handshake is not spelled out in the description. The country and maxItems parameters are only minimally described in the schema, and the description doesn't compensate. Still, the core operation is adequately covered.
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 75%, and the payment parameter is well documented with the two-step behavior. The description adds value by clarifying the payment currency (testnet USDC) and framing the tool's purpose around App Store version checking.
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 states a specific action ('Checks current App Store version') and a specific input mechanism (bundle ID). It doesn't name sibling tools to differentiate from, but no siblings are listed, so the clarity is sufficient for selection.
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 includes practical usage context by noting 'x402 payment required (testnet USDC)'. However, it doesn't explicitly describe the two-step payment flow (omit payment first, then receive requirements and retry), which is only implied by the schema's payment parameter description.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Only one tool exists, so there is no possibility of confusing its purpose with another tool. The tool description clearly explains what it checks and what input it requires.
The single tool name uses snake_case and is internally consistent, but it omits a verb prefix (e.g., 'get_), which deviates from the typical verb_noun naming pattern. With only one tool, a stronger pattern cannot be established.
A single tool is slightly below the typical 3-15 range, but the server's stated purpose is extremely narrow—checking an App Store version by bundle ID—so one tool feels reasonably scoped. It is not excessive or wildly incomplete for this domain.
For the stated purpose of checking the current App Store version by bundle ID, there are no obvious missing operations. The tool fully satisfies the narrow domain without leaving functional dead ends.