Skip to main content
Glama
erayendes

Heimdall App Store Connect MCP

by erayendes
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript

app_store_review_details__get

Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieve specific App Store review details by ID, optionally including related app store version and review attachments to minimize API calls.

Instructions

Read one App Store review detail by ID. [GET /v1/appStoreReviewDetails/{id}]

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYesID from the matching list call.
includeNocomma-separated list of relationships to include Pull related records in the same call. Without it, checking a relationship costs one extra call per row returned.
fields_appStoreReviewDetailsNothe fields to include for returned resources of type appStoreReviewDetails 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. Changed3 schema fields changedv2.0.0
    • addedInput schema / properties / fields_appStoreReviewDetails
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "the fields to include for returned resources of type appStoreReviewDetails Return only these attributes. A full row set can exceed 200 KB.",
+  "items": {
+    "enum": [
+      "contactFirstName",
+      "contactLastName",
+      "contactPhone",
+      "contactEmail",
+      "demoAccountName",
+      "demoAccountPassword",
+      "demoAccountRequired",
+      "notes",
+      "appStoreVersion",
+      "appStoreReviewAttachments"
+    ],
+    "type": "string"
+  },
+  "type": "array"
+}
    • removedInput schema / properties / id / description
      Removed value: -"Resource identifier."
    • changedInput schema / properties / include / description
      Previous value: -"comma-separated list of relationships to include"New value: +"comma-separated list of relationships to include Pull related records in the same call. Without it, checking a relationship costs one extra call per row returned."
  3. First observedv1.3.0

TDQS

A3.6/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the agent knows it's a safe read. The description adds only the 'by ID' constraint and endpoint, which is already obvious from the name and schema. It provides no additional behavioral context like response size or relationship handling.

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?

Two short sentences, front-loaded with the action and resource, followed by the endpoint. Every word earns its place; no redundancy or filler.

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 simple single-item GET with strong annotations and full schema coverage, the description is sufficient. It doesn't explain the return structure, but the resource name and selectable fields imply the response. Since no output schema is present, some ambiguity remains, but this is a low-complexity tool.

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%, with each parameter (id, include, fields_appStoreReviewDetails) already documented in detail. The tool description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond the endpoint, so the baseline score of 3 applies.

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 clearly states the action (Read), the resource (App Store review detail), and the scope (one by ID). The endpoint `[GET /v1/appStoreReviewDetails/{id}]` reinforces this. It distinguishes from sibling tools like create/update/list by emphasizing it's a single-item read.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

No explicit guidance about when to use this vs alternatives. The 'by ID' phrasing implies it's for fetching a specific record, but there are no exclusions or alternative tool mentions. This is only implied usage.

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