Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Heimdall App Store Connect MCP

Heimdall App Store Connect MCP

by erayendes
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript

release__submit

Submits an App Store version to Apple for review by opening a review submission, adding the version, and checking submittability first to avoid rejected handoffs.

Instructions

Send an App Store version to Apple for review in one call — it opens the submission, puts the version in it, and hands it over. Checks first that the version is actually submittable and refuses rather than submitting something that will bounce. Use this instead of opening an empty review submission by hand, which by itself sends nothing.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
appYesApp name, bundle ID (com.example.app) or numeric Apple ID.
versionNoVersion string (e.g. "3.2.0"). Defaults to the newest editable version.
platformNoWhich platform’s version. Needed when the app has one on more than one platform.
skip_preflightNoSubmit even when the pre-flight finds blocking gaps. Off by default, and worth leaving off: every gap it reports is one Apple enforces.

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
appYes
stateNo
stepsYesWhat was done, in order, so a partial run says where it stopped.
versionYes
platformNo
preflightNo
submissionIdNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changedv2.8.0
    • addedInput schema / properties / platform
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Which platform’s version. Needed when the app has one on more than one platform.",
+  "enum": [
+    "IOS",
+    "MAC_OS",
+    "TV_OS",
+    "VISION_OS"
+  ],
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • addedOutput schema / properties / platform
      Added value: +{
+  "type": "string"
+}
  2. Addedv2.3.0

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral burden and does well by disclosing the composite side effects: opening a submission, adding the version, and handing it to Apple. It also explains the preflight guard and refusal behavior, though it does not mention permissions, irreversibility, or rate limits.

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 three tightly written sentences with the core action front-loaded. Each sentence adds distinct value: what it does, the preflight safeguard, and the alternative workflow.

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 submission action, the description is complete enough to select and invoke the tool correctly, especially since the schema is fully documented and an output schema exists. It could be richer about permissions or post-submission irreversibility, but the essential workflow is covered.

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 input schema already documents all four parameters thoroughly. The description reinforces the preflight concept but does not add syntax or usage meaning beyond what the schema provides.

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 states a specific verb and resource: send an App Store version to Apple for review. It also explains the one-call composite behavior and explicitly distinguishes this from opening an empty review submission by hand.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

It names the alternative workflow explicitly by saying to use this instead of opening an empty review submission by hand. The preflight-refusal behavior also gives clear guidance about the default safe path.

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