Skip to main content
Glama
erayendes

Heimdall App Store Connect MCP

by erayendes
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript

beta_app_review_details__get

Read-onlyIdempotent

Fetch a specific beta app review detail by ID to access contact info, demo account credentials, and notes. Retrieve only the fields you need or include related app data in one call.

Instructions

Read one beta app review detail by ID. [GET /v1/betaAppReviewDetails/{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_betaAppReviewDetailsNothe fields to include for returned resources of type betaAppReviewDetails 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_betaAppReviewDetails
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "the fields to include for returned resources of type betaAppReviewDetails Return only these attributes. A full row set can exceed 200 KB.",
+  "items": {
+    "enum": [
+      "contactFirstName",
+      "contactLastName",
+      "contactPhone",
+      "contactEmail",
+      "demoAccountName",
+      "demoAccountPassword",
+      "demoAccountRequired",
+      "notes",
+      "app"
+    ],
+    "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

A4/5.0
Behavior3/5

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 safety profile is clear. The description adds minimal behavioral context beyond 'Read one' and the HTTP endpoint. It does not mention error handling, rate limits, or response structure, but given the simple read-only nature, this is acceptable; no additional non-obvious behaviors are disclosed.

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?

The description is a single sentence plus an HTTP endpoint notation. It is extremely concise and front-loaded, with no wasted words. Every element contributes to understanding the tool's purpose.

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 read operation with a clear ID parameter, the description conveys the essential purpose. There is no output schema, but the description doesn't explain return values. However, the tool's name and the resource concept are self-explanatory, and the schema covers parameters. It is slightly minimal but sufficient 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%, with each parameter (id, include, fields_betaAppReviewDetails) having descriptive text. The description only mentions 'by ID', which aligns with the required 'id' parameter but adds nothing new. The schema already documents the parameters, so the baseline 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 'Read one beta app review detail by ID' which specifies a concrete action (read) on a specific resource (beta app review detail) with a focus on a single item via ID. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like beta_app_review_details__list (which reads multiple) and beta_app_review_details__update (which modifies).

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?

The description implies usage when you have a known ID and need a single beta app review detail. It does not explicitly contrast with alternatives or list when not to use it, but the 'by ID' phrasing provides clear context that this is for single-item reads, making it distinct from list operations.

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