Add localized beta testing metadata for an app in App Store Connect by specifying locale, description, marketing URL, feedback email, and privacy policy URL.
Create a beta app localization. [POST /v1/betaAppLocalizations]
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| body | Yes | JSON:API request body (Apple schema: BetaAppLocalizationCreateRequest). |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.3.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=false, idempotentHint=false, destructiveHint=false, so the description correctly implies a write operation. However, it adds no additional behavioral context such as required permissions, side effects, error conditions, or response details. For a create tool with no output schema, more disclosure would be helpful.
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?
The description is extremely concise, with one clear sentence and the endpoint. It is front-loaded with the action. However, it could benefit from a brief note on response or typical usage without becoming verbose.
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?
Given the tool's complexity (nested required parameters, multiple optional fields) and no output schema, the description is insufficient. It doesn't mention what is returned, validation rules (e.g., locale format), or common failure modes. The agent is underinformed for correct invocation.
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%, but the description only provides a generic reference to the Apple schema. The 'body' parameter's description ('JSON:API request body...') adds no semantic meaning beyond the schema structure. The agent is left to fully interpret the nested required fields without explanatory context about fields like locale, relationships, etc.
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 'Create a beta app localization' with the HTTP method and endpoint. The verb 'Create' and resource 'beta app localization' are specific, and the tool name clearly distinguishes it from CRUD siblings like get, list, delete, update.
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 guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. No prerequisites, when-not-to-use, or comparison with similar tools like beta_app_localizations__get or beta_app_localizations__update. The agent must infer usage from the CRUD pattern alone.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.