Skip to main content
Glama
erayendes

Heimdall App Store Connect MCP

by erayendes
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript

asc__status

Read-only

Verify Apple credentials with a single request and report server config, JWT state, API rate limits, plus optional expiry and capability checks.

Instructions

Report server configuration, spec version, loaded domains, JWT token state and remaining API rate limit. Also verifies credentials against Apple with a single lightweight request.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
check_connectionNoIssue one real API call to verify credentials (default true).
check_expirationsNoAlso list signing certificates and provisioning profiles expiring within 30 days (two extra API calls; default false).
check_capabilitiesNoAlso report what this API key can reach, by probing one cheap endpoint per role family (reports, metadata, reviews, user management, provisioning) and recording ok/forbidden/unauthorized per family — never the role name itself, which no endpoint returns. Up to five extra API calls, fewer when check_connection or check_expirations already covered part of it; default false. Call this once, before relying on a family, rather than discovering the gap from a 403 mid-task.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv2.3.0
    • addedInput schema / properties / check_capabilities
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Also report what this API key can reach, by probing one cheap endpoint per role family (reports, metadata, reviews, user management, provisioning) and recording ok/forbidden/unauthorized per family — never the role name itself, which no endpoint returns. Up to five extra API calls, fewer when check_connection or check_expirations already covered part of it; default false. Call this once, before relying on a family, rather than discovering the gap from a 403 mid-task.",
+  "type": "boolean"
+}
  2. First observedv1.3.0

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true. The description adds a useful behavioral disclosure beyond that: it makes a single lightweight API request to Apple to verify credentials. Optional flags' extra network calls are documented in the schema parameter descriptions, and all behavior remains read-only. It could mention more about side effects or cost, but this is well covered for a read-only status tool.

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 concise sentences with no filler. The first sentence front-loads the core reporting scope, and the second adds the credential verification behavior. Every sentence earns its place.

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 read-only status tool with a fully self-documenting schema, the description is nearly complete. It states what is reported, that one API call is made, and optional probes are explained in the parameters. There is no output schema, so the description could more explicitly describe the response shape, but the listed report items provide enough for an agent to select and invoke the tool correctly.

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%, so the baseline is 3. The parameter descriptions in the schema fully cover defaults, number of extra API calls, and usage guidance. The main tool description adds no parameter-level meaning beyond what the schema already provides.

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

Purpose4/5

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

The description uses a specific verb ('Report') and lists exactly what is reported: server configuration, spec version, loaded domains, JWT token state, and remaining API rate limit. It also adds the credential verification behavior. However, it does not explicitly differentiate itself from sibling tools like asc__account_status or asc__discover_domains.

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?

The purpose implies it is a status/health check and 'verifies credentials' suggests when it might be used, but there is no explicit statement of when to use this tool versus alternatives or when not to use it. The check_capabilities parameter description contains embedded usage guidance, but the main description does not.

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