Skip to main content
Glama
erayendes

Heimdall App Store Connect MCP

by erayendes
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript

accessibility_declarations__get

Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieve a specific accessibility declaration by its ID to inspect app accessibility attributes such as captions, contrast, and voice control support.

Instructions

Read one accessibility declaration by ID. [GET /v1/accessibilityDeclarations/{id}]

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYesID from the matching list call.
fields_accessibilityDeclarationsNothe fields to include for returned resources of type accessibilityDeclarations Return only these attributes. A full row set can exceed 200 KB.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv2.0.1
    • addedInput schema / properties / id / description
      Added value: +"ID from the matching list call."
  2. Changed2 schema fields changedv2.0.0
    • addedInput schema / properties / fields_accessibilityDeclarations
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "the fields to include for returned resources of type accessibilityDeclarations Return only these attributes. A full row set can exceed 200 KB.",
+  "items": {
+    "enum": [
+      "deviceFamily",
+      "state",
+      "supportsAudioDescriptions",
+      "supportsCaptions",
+      "supportsDarkInterface",
+      "supportsDifferentiateWithoutColorAlone",
+      "supportsLargerText",
+      "supportsReducedMotion",
+      "supportsSufficientContrast",
+      "supportsVoiceControl",
+      "supportsVoiceover"
+    ],
+    "type": "string"
+  },
+  "type": "array"
+}
    • removedInput schema / properties / id / description
      Removed value: -"Resource identifier."
  3. First observedv1.3.0

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint false. The description adds no new behavioral context—it merely restates the action. No mention of response format, errors, or performance characteristics beyond what the schema hints at.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence with the endpoint included. No filler words or redundant information; it is appropriately sized for the tool's simplicity.

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

Completeness4/5

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

For a straightforward read-by-ID operation with good schema coverage and safety annotations, the description is sufficient. It could hint at what the response contains, but the tool name and endpoint make the return type predictable.

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 descriptions fully cover both parameters: 'id' explains it comes from a list call, and 'fields_accessibilityDeclarations' explains selective attribute returns and the 200KB size caveat. The tool description adds no parameter-specific meaning.

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

Purpose5/5

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

The description uses a specific verb ('Read') and clearly identifies the resource ('one accessibility declaration by ID'). The endpoint path adds further precision and distinguishes it from list/create/update/delete siblings.

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?

The usage context is clear: use this when you have an accessibility declaration ID and need a single record. It does not explicitly state alternatives or when-not-to-use, but the ID-based scope is self-evident.

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