analytics_reports__get
Retrieve a specific analytics report from App Store Connect using its ID.
Instructions
Read one analytics report by ID. [GET /v1/analyticsReports/{id}]
Input Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| id | Yes | Resource identifier. |
Retrieve a specific analytics report from App Store Connect using its ID.
Read one analytics report by ID. [GET /v1/analyticsReports/{id}]
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| id | Yes | Resource identifier. |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false. The description adds the HTTP method (GET) but otherwise does not provide behavioral details beyond what annotations convey. No contradiction.
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 concise: two sentences, zero wasted words. Front-loaded with the key action. Every sentence serves a purpose.
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?
For a simple get-by-ID operation with one parameter and no output schema, the description is adequate but does not mention what the response contains or any related resources. Minimal completeness.
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?
Schema coverage is 100% with one parameter 'id' described as 'Resource identifier.' The description adds that the id is for an analytics report, which is already implied by the tool name. Minimal added meaning.
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?
Description clearly states 'Read one analytics report by ID', specifying the verb and resource. The inclusion of the HTTP path further clarifies the action. It distinguishes from siblings like analytics_report_instances__get (which gets an instance) or analytics_report_requests__reports__list (which lists reports).
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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description simply states what it does without suggesting specific contexts or exclusions. Among many siblings, the agent gets no help in selecting this tool.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.
curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/erayendes/app-store-connect-mcp'
If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server