PinMeTo Location MCP

Official

by PinMeTo

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

TypeScript

Remote

Apple Maps insights

pinmeto_get_apple_insights

Read-only

Fetch Apple Maps metrics for all locations or a specific store, with time aggregation and period-over-period comparisons to evaluate performance.

Instructions

Fetch Apple metrics for all locations, or a single location if storeId provided. Supports time aggregation (default: total) and period comparisons.

Comparison Options:

compare_with="prior_period": Compare with same-duration period before (MoM, QoQ)
compare_with="prior_year": Compare with same dates last year (YoY)
When comparison is active, each metric includes a comparison field with prior, delta, deltaPercent

Error Handling:

Rate limit (429): errorCode="RATE_LIMITED", message includes retry timing
Not found (404): errorCode="NOT_FOUND" if storeId doesn't exist
All errors: check structuredContent.errorCode and .retryable for programmatic handling

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`to`	Yes	End date (YYYY-MM-DD)
`from`	Yes	Start date (YYYY-MM-DD)
`storeId`	No	Optional store ID to fetch a single location
`aggregation`	No	Time aggregation: total (default, maximum token reduction), daily, weekly, monthly, quarterly, half-yearly, yearly	total
`compare_with`	No	Compare with: prior_period (MoM/QoQ for same-duration period before), prior_year (YoY for same dates last year), or none (default)	none
`response_format`	No	Response format: "json" (default, token-efficient) or "markdown" (human-readable with tables)	json

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`error`	No	Error message if the request failed
`warning`	No	Warning message (e.g., incomplete data due to lag)
`insights`	No	Array of insights by metric. Flattened (no values array) when aggregation=total, multi-period otherwise (absent on error)
`errorCode`	No	Error code for programmatic handling
`retryable`	No	Whether the operation can be retried
`compareWith`	No	Comparison period type used: "none", "prior_period", or "prior_year"
`periodRange`	No	Date range for the current period data
`warningCode`	No	Warning code for programmatic handling
`comparisonError`	No	Error message if comparison data could not be fetched (current period data still returned)
`timeAggregation`	No	Time aggregation level applied to the data (e.g., "total", "monthly", "daily")
`priorPeriodRange`	No	Date range for the prior period (present when compare_with is specified)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed11 schema fields changedv4.3.0Sep 5, 2026

changedInput schema / $schema

Previous value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"New value: +"https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema"

removedInput schema / additionalProperties
```
Removed value: -false
```
removedInput schema / properties / to / $ref
```
Removed value: -"#/properties/from"
```
addedInput schema / properties / to / pattern
```
Added value: +"^\\d{4}-\\d{2}-\\d{2}$"
```
addedInput schema / properties / to / type
```
Added value: +"string"
```

changedOutput schema / $schema

Previous value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"New value: +"https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema"

removedOutput schema / properties / priorPeriodRange / $ref
```
Removed value: -"#/properties/periodRange"
```
addedOutput schema / properties / priorPeriodRange / additionalProperties
```
Added value: +false
```

addedOutput schema / properties / priorPeriodRange / properties

Added value: +{
+  "from": {
+    "description": "Start date (YYYY-MM-DD)",
+    "pattern": "^\\d{4}-\\d{2}-\\d{2}$",
+    "type": "string"
+  },
+  "to": {
+    "description": "End date (YYYY-MM-DD)",
+    "pattern": "^\\d{4}-\\d{2}-\\d{2}$",
+    "type": "string"
+  }
+}

addedOutput schema / properties / priorPeriodRange / required
```
Added value: +[
+  "from",
+  "to"
+]
```
addedOutput schema / properties / priorPeriodRange / type
```
Added value: +"object"
```

First observedv4.0.0Aug 10, 2026

TDQS

A4.7/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the readOnlyHint annotation, the description discloses meaningful behavioral details: comparison response fields (prior, delta, deltaPercent), rate-limit error structure, 404 handling, and retryable/errorCode fields for programmatic handling. This significantly exceeds what annotations alone provide.

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 well-structured with clear sections for comparison options and error handling. Every sentence adds useful information. The main purpose is front-loaded, and formatting makes it easy for an agent to extract key behavior quickly.

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?

Given the output schema exists and the input schema fully documents parameters, the description covers the remaining critical operational context: comparison behavior, error handling, and response format options. Nothing essential is missing for an agent to select and invoke this tool correctly.

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

Parameters4/5

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

Schema coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents every parameter. The description adds value by explaining comparison semantics (MoM/QoQ, YoY), the resulting comparison fields, and the token-reduction intent behind 'total' aggregation, which is not evident from the schema alone.

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?

The description opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Fetch Apple metrics for all locations, or a single location if storeId provided.' This clearly differentiates it from sibling tools like Google or Facebook insights, and the storeId option clarifies scope.

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?

The description provides clear context by identifying the tool as Apple Maps insights and explaining the all-locations vs. single-location behavior. It does not explicitly name sibling alternatives or state when not to use it, but the platform is unambiguous from purpose, title, and sibling names.

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

Deploy Server