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

app-store-connect-mcp

by devinwang
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

subscription_offer_codes_prices_get_to_many_relationship

Fetch the price relationship identifiers linked to a subscription offer code by its ID. Use limit to paginate related prices in App Store Connect.

Instructions

GET /v1/subscriptionOfferCodes/{id}/relationships/prices (GET /v1/subscriptionOfferCodes/{id}/relationships/prices)

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": "subscription_offer_codes_prices_get_to_many_relationship"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYesthe id of the requested resource
limitNomaximum resources per page

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.5.0

TDQS

D1.8/5.0
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, yet it says nothing about pagination, auth, or that this is a read-only relationship listing. A bare path is not behavioral disclosure.

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 the single sentence is a redundant restatement of the name with the path repeated twice in parentheses. Nothing is front-loaded with useful information because there is no useful information.

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

Completeness2/5

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

For a relationship-listing tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description should at least explain what a 'prices' relationship returns and how to page it. As written, an agent has only the raw endpoint to work from.

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% (both 'id' and 'limit' are documented in the schema), so the baseline of 3 applies; the description adds no syntax, format, or pagination semantics beyond the schema.

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 only restates the tool name as a URL path: 'GET /v1/subscriptionOfferCodes/{id}/relationships/prices'. It technically conveys a GET on the prices relationship of a subscription offer code, but gives no plain-language statement of purpose and nothing that distinguishes it from siblings such as subscription_offer_codes_prices_get_to_many_related or in_app_purchase_offer_codes_prices_get_to_many_relationship.

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?

No when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, and no mention of the near-identical sibling tools the agent must choose between. The agent is left to infer everything from the name.

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