Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
appforshare-mcp

appforshare-mcp

Official
by appforshare
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Hybrid

Pick a channel address

set_channel_address
Idempotent

Assign a unique custom address to an AppForShare release channel, replacing its old slug while keeping redirects active for 30 days; confirm before applying.

Instructions

Give a channel its own address, for example /c/acme-beta: 3 to 40 lower case letters, digits and hyphens, unique on AppForShare. The old address keeps redirecting for 30 days and the in-app update check on it keeps working; old addresses are never given to anyone else. Name the app by bundle id (app) or project id. Ask the person first and pass confirm: true. Pro and Team, Developer role.

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": {
      "channel": "<channel>",
      "slug": "<slug>",
      "confirm": "<confirm>"
    },
    "name": "set_channel_address"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
appNoBundle id or package name of the app
slugYesNew address, for example acme-beta
channelYesChannel name such as beta
confirmYes
projectNoProject id, instead of app

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.0.7

TDQS

A4.6/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the annotations, it discloses that the previous address redirects for 30 days, that the in-app update check keeps working, and that old addresses are never reused. That is meaningful mutation behavior and permission context, while the annotations only state non-destructive, idempotent, and non-read-only.

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 front-loaded with purpose, then moves through format, redirect behavior, app identification, confirmation, and plan/role in a compact sequence. No sentence is filler; the fragments are dense but each carries needed operational detail.

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?

For a non-destructive, idempotent mutation with no output schema, it covers the important edge behavior (redirect window, non-reuse), naming, validation, confirmation, and authorization. Nothing essential to correct invocation is obviously missing.

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?

The schema already covers 80% of the parameters, but the description adds constraints absent from the schema for slug (3 to 40 lowercase letters, digits or hyphens, unique on AppForShare). It also clarifies that app and project are alternatives and explains that confirm means the person has been asked first.

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 opens with a concrete verb-resource pair ('Give a channel its own address'), an example, and the resulting URL shape. It is not merely a restatement of the name or title, though it does not explicitly contrast itself with sibling tools such as set_testflight_link, which keeps it at 4 rather than 5.

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?

It supplies clear usage prerequisites: ask the person first, pass confirm: true, and requires Pro or Team plan with the Developer role. It does not name alternative tools or a when-not-to-use condition, so it is clear context rather than full routing guidance.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools