Skip to main content
Glama
concavegit

App Store Connect MCP Server

by concavegit

list_group_testers

Retrieve all beta testers assigned to a specific beta group for iOS or macOS app testing in App Store Connect.

Instructions

Get a list of all testers in a specific beta group

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
groupIdYesThe ID of the beta group
limitNoMaximum number of testers to return (default: 100)

Implementation Reference

  • The main execution handler for the 'list_group_testers' tool. It validates input, sanitizes the limit parameter, and calls the AppStoreConnectClient to GET /betaGroups/{groupId}/betaTesters.
    async listGroupTesters(args: { 
      groupId: string; 
      limit?: number;
    }): Promise<ListBetaTestersResponse> {
      const { groupId, limit = 100 } = args;
      
      validateRequired(args, ['groupId']);
    
      return this.client.get<ListBetaTestersResponse>(`/betaGroups/${groupId}/betaTesters`, {
        limit: sanitizeLimit(limit)
      });
    }
  • Input schema definition for the tool, specifying required 'groupId' parameter and optional 'limit'.
      name: "list_group_testers",
      description: "Get a list of all testers in a specific beta group",
      inputSchema: {
        type: "object",
        properties: {
          groupId: {
            type: "string",
            description: "The ID of the beta group"
          },
          limit: {
            type: "number",
            description: "Maximum number of testers to return (default: 100)",
            minimum: 1,
            maximum: 200
          }
        },
        required: ["groupId"]
      }
    },
  • src/index.ts:1326-1327 (registration)
    MCP tool registration in the CallToolRequest handler switch statement, mapping 'list_group_testers' to BetaHandlers.listGroupTesters method.
    return { toolResult: await this.betaHandlers.listGroupTesters(args as any) };
  • TypeScript interface defining the expected response structure for the listGroupTesters handler.
    export interface ListBetaTestersResponse {
      data: BetaTester[];
    }
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the tool retrieves a list but doesn't mention whether it's read-only, paginated, rate-limited, or requires specific permissions. For a list operation with zero annotation coverage, this leaves significant behavioral gaps unaddressed.

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?

The description is a single, clear sentence that efficiently conveys the core purpose without unnecessary words. It's front-loaded with the main action and resource, making it easy to parse quickly. Every word serves a functional purpose in the description.

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 list tool with 2 parameters and 100% schema coverage but no annotations or output schema, the description is minimally adequate. It states what the tool does but lacks behavioral context, usage guidance, and output information. The description meets basic requirements but leaves room for improvement given the tool's straightforward nature.

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 description implies a 'groupId' parameter by mentioning 'specific beta group', but doesn't add meaning beyond what the schema already provides (100% coverage). It doesn't explain the 'limit' parameter or provide context like default behavior beyond the schema's documentation. Baseline 3 is appropriate since the schema fully documents parameters.

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 clearly states the action ('Get a list') and resource ('all testers in a specific beta group'), making the purpose immediately understandable. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'list_users' or 'list_devices' which might also involve testers, though the beta group context provides some implicit distinction.

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 description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention sibling tools like 'list_users' or 'list_beta_groups', nor does it specify prerequisites such as needing an existing beta group ID. The context is limited to the beta group scope without further usage context.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/concavegit/app-store-connect-mcp-server'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server