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

app-store-connect-mcp

by devinwang
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

in_app_purchase_images_delete_instance

Delete a specific in-app purchase image by ID via the App Store Connect API to remove outdated or incorrect promotional artwork from an IAP listing.

Instructions

DELETE /v1/inAppPurchaseImages/{id} (DELETE /v1/inAppPurchaseImages/{id})

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": {
      "id": "<id>"
    },
    "name": "in_app_purchase_images_delete_instance"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYesthe id of the requested resource

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.5.0

TDQS

D1.9/5.0
Behavior1/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full behavioral burden, yet it discloses nothing about irreversibility, required permissions, or side effects. The only hint is the word DELETE, which merely echoes the tool name and the schema's id parameter.

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?

The text is short but structurally wasteful: the same route is duplicated verbatim inside parentheses, so the sentence length is redundant rather than efficient. It is under-specification disguised as brevity, not purposeful conciseness.

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 a destructive mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description should explain permissions, reversibility, and effect. It supplies none of this, leaving an agent unable to judge consequences of calling it.

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?

There is a single required parameter ('id') and the schema already documents it at 100% coverage, so per the baseline rule a 3 applies. The description adds no syntax, format, or scoping detail beyond what the schema provides.

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 essentially a restatement of the tool name and HTTP method: 'DELETE /v1/inAppPurchaseImages/{id}' says only what the name already conveys (delete an in-app purchase image by id). It does not differentiate this tool from the many sibling delete-instance tools in any meaningful way beyond the path.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as in_app_purchase_images_update_instance or in_app_purchase_images_v2_delete_instance, nor any prerequisites. It offers no context at all beyond the raw route.

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