Skip to main content
Glama
erayendes

Heimdall App Store Connect MCP

by erayendes
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript

beta_feedback_screenshot_submissions__get

Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieve a single beta feedback screenshot submission by its ID to inspect details like screenshots, comments, device info, and related build or tester records.

Instructions

Read one beta feedback screenshot submission by ID. [GET /v1/betaFeedbackScreenshotSubmissions/{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_betaFeedbackScreenshotSubmissionsNothe fields to include for returned resources of type betaFeedbackScreenshotSubmissions 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_betaFeedbackScreenshotSubmissions
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "the fields to include for returned resources of type betaFeedbackScreenshotSubmissions Return only these attributes. A full row set can exceed 200 KB.",
+  "items": {
+    "enum": [
+      "createdDate",
+      "comment",
+      "email",
+      "deviceModel",
+      "osVersion",
+      "locale",
+      "timeZone",
+      "architecture",
+      "connectionType",
+      "pairedAppleWatch",
+      "appUptimeInMilliseconds",
+      "diskBytesAvailable",
+      "diskBytesTotal",
+      "batteryPercentage",
+      "screenWidthInPoints",
+      "screenHeightInPoints",
+      "appPlatform",
+      "devicePlatform",
+      "deviceFamily",
+      "buildBundleId",
+      "screenshots",
+      "build",
+      "tester"
+    ],
+    "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

A3.9/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

The description's 'Read' aligns with annotations (readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true). It adds the endpoint URL but no additional behavioral context such as response size or pagination. Annotations already cover the safety profile, so the description is sufficient but not rich.

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?

A single, front-loaded sentence with the verb and resource, followed by the endpoint. Every word earns its place; no redundant or vague content.

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?

For a straightforward single-get tool with strong annotations and fully described schema, this description is complete enough. The fields parameter enumerates possible return fields, removing the need for a detailed return-value explanation. The sibling list tool provides context for when to use this getter.

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 description provides no parameter details, but schema coverage is 100% with thorough descriptions for id, include, and fields_betaFeedbackScreenshotSubmissions. Since the schema explains the ID source and relationship/field selection trade-offs, the description adds nothing extra.

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') and the resource ('one beta feedback screenshot submission by ID'). It distinguishes from the list sibling by specifying single-resource retrieval via ID.

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 description implies use when you have an ID, but it does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use it. The schema's id description references the matching list call, but the description itself lacks such guidance.

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