Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
app-store-connect-mcp

app-store-connect-mcp

by devinwang
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

devices_get_collection

Retrieve and filter App Store Connect devices by name, UDID, platform, or status; sort or limit results to manage registered devices.

Instructions

GET /v1/devices (GET /v1/devices)

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "devices_get_collection"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
sortNocomma-separated list of sort expressions; resources will be sorted as specified
limitNomaximum resources per page
filter_idNofilter by id(s)
filter_nameNofilter by attribute 'name'
filter_udidNofilter by attribute 'udid'
filter_statusNofilter by attribute 'status'
fields_devicesNothe fields to include for returned resources of type devices
filter_platformNofilter by attribute 'platform'

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.5.0

TDQS

D1.7/5.0
Behavior1/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden, and it discloses nothing: not pagination behavior (despite a 'limit' param), not auth requirements, not default sort order, not result cardinality.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness2/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

It is short, but brevity here comes from under-specification, not conciseness. The parenthetical restatement of the same endpoint string is pure redundancy with zero informational value.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness1/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For an 8-parameter collection-list tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description supplies none of the context an agent needs — no indication of return shape, pagination, or filtering semantics.

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?

Schema description coverage is 100% — all 8 parameters (sort, limit, filters, fields, etc.) are documented in the schema with enum values and descriptions. The description adds nothing beyond the schema, so the baseline of 3 applies.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose2/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description is the literal endpoint string 'GET /v1/devices' repeated twice in parentheses. It names a resource and HTTP verb but never says what the tool does in human terms — no mention of listing/fetching the device collection, no scope, no differentiation from siblings like devices_get_instance or profiles_devices_get_to_many_related.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines1/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

There is no guidance whatsoever about when to use this tool, when not to, prerequisites, or which sibling to prefer for related device queries.

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