Heimdall App Store Connect MCP

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

asc__account_status

Read-only

Shows every app's live/in-flight version and whose move it is, translating App Store states into actions: rejections, held approvals, export compliance blocks, never-submitted versions.

Instructions

Show every app in the account with the version that is live, the version in flight, and whose move it is — in one call. Translates App Store states into the action they imply: approved-and-held apps, rejections, submissions stuck on export compliance, and versions never submitted. Also opens each app's review submission, so an in-app purchase or event Apple rejected shows up even when the version itself reads as fine. Start here when the question is "what needs my attention?" rather than one app. Read-only.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`only_actionable`	No	Return only the apps waiting on you, dropping the ones where nothing is pending or Apple has the ball (default false).

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`apps`	Yes
`note`	No
`counts`	Yes	apps, waitingOnYou, waitingOnApple.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedv2.4.0Sep 18, 2026

addedOutput schema / properties / apps / items / properties / rejectedItems

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Items Apple rejected in the open submission — an in-app purchase, event or experiment sent with the version. Empty means none; null means the submission could not be read, not that it was clean.",
+  "items": {
+    "properties": {
+      "id": {
+        "type": "string"
+      },
+      "kind": {
+        "type": "string"
+      }
+    },
+    "type": "object"
+  },
+  "type": "array"
+}

Addedv2.3.0Aug 26, 2026

TDQS

A4.3/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

The annotations provide readOnlyHint=true, and the description reinforces this with 'Read-only.' It adds behavioral value by disclosing that the tool translates states into implied actions and opens each app's review submission to surface rejected IAPs or events, which is non-obvious behavior.

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?

Three dense sentences with no filler. The core aggregation and translation behavior is front-loaded, the guidance comes second, and the read-only confirmation closes. Every sentence earns its place.

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

Completeness5/5

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

The tool has a single optional boolean with a complete schema description and an output schema. The description covers what it returns conceptually, when to use it, and its read-only nature, so an agent can select and invoke it correctly without additional context.

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?

The single parameter, only_actionable, has a complete schema description covering default behavior and what is dropped. The description adds no extra parameter information, but with 100% schema coverage, a baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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?

States a specific verb ('Show every app in the account'), the exact data points (live version, in-flight version, whose move it is), and the semantic translation of App Store states into implied actions. This clearly distinguishes it from one-app tools like apps__get or app_store_versions__get.

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?

Explicitly says 'Start here when the question is "what needs my attention?" rather than one app.' This gives a clear trigger and an exclusion, though it does not name specific sibling alternatives such as asc__status or apps__list.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

Deploy Server