Deletes a specified App Store screenshot set by ID, removing it from App Store Connect through the API. Use it to clean up or replace screenshot sets during app metadata management.
DELETE /v1/appScreenshotSets/{id} (DELETE /v1/appScreenshotSets/{id})
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| id | Yes | the id of the requested resource |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.5.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden, yet it says nothing about the destructive nature, whether deletion cascades to contained screenshots, required auth/roles, or reversibility. An agent cannot tell what the side effects are.
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?
Extremely short, but the parenthetical repeats the exact same path verbatim, wasting the only words present. Brevity here reflects under-specification rather than disciplined concision.
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?
A destructive delete operation with no annotations, no output schema, and a one-parameter schema needs the description to explain consequences; it explains nothing. The definition is completely inadequate for an agent to call this safely.
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?
Only one parameter and schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents 'id' fully. Per the baseline rule for high schema coverage, a 3 is appropriate even with zero parameter information in the description.
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 text restates the HTTP verb and path (DELETE /v1/appScreenshotSets/{id}) which duplicates the tool name's own verb+resource, adding no information an agent doesn't already have. It is not misleading, but it is a tautological restatement rather than a description of purpose.
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?
No guidance on when to use this tool versus siblings such as app_screenshot_sets_delete_instance's neighbors app_screenshots_delete_instance or app_preview_sets_delete_instance. No preconditions, no exclusions, nothing that routes the agent.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.