Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
erayendes

Heimdall App Store Connect MCP

by erayendes
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript

review_submission_items__create

Destructive

Add one version, event, or other releasable item to an open App Store review submission; repeat the call for each item Apple should review.

Instructions

Put one thing into an open review submission — a version, an event, or another releasable item. One per call, so repeat it for each thing Apple should look at. [POST /v1/reviewSubmissionItems] RELEASE-level write.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
bodyYesJSON:API request body (Apple schema: ReviewSubmissionItemCreateRequest).

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changedv2.8.0
    • addedInput schema / properties / body / properties / data / properties / relationships / properties / appAssetLibraryImage
      Added value: +{
+  "additionalProperties": false,
+  "properties": {
+    "data": {
+      "additionalProperties": false,
+      "properties": {
+        "id": {
+          "type": "string"
+        },
+        "type": {
+          "enum": [
+            "appAssetLibraryImages"
+          ],
+          "type": "string"
+        }
+      },
+      "required": [
+        "id",
+        "type"
+      ],
+      "type": "object"
+    }
+  },
+  "type": "object"
+}
    • addedInput schema / properties / body / properties / data / properties / relationships / properties / appAssetLibraryVideo
      Added value: +{
+  "additionalProperties": false,
+  "properties": {
+    "data": {
+      "additionalProperties": false,
+      "properties": {
+        "id": {
+          "type": "string"
+        },
+        "type": {
+          "enum": [
+            "appAssetLibraryVideos"
+          ],
+          "type": "string"
+        }
+      },
+      "required": [
+        "id",
+        "type"
+      ],
+      "type": "object"
+    }
+  },
+  "type": "object"
+}
  2. First observedv1.3.0

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare write, non-idempotent, destructive, so the description isn't obliged to restate safety. It does add genuinely useful context: the target submission must be open, and the 'RELEASE-level write' note signals the permission/scope. It doesn't say whether duplicates are rejected or what happens on an already-submitted item.

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?

Three short, front-loaded fragments with zero filler; the cardinality rule is placed where an agent will read it before constructing the body.

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?

Given a fully described nested schema, write/destructive annotations, and no output schema, the description covers the essentials: what goes in, how many per call, and the scope. The notable omission is the prerequisite that the parent submission must first be created and left open.

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 coverage is 100% with a single nested body param, so the schema carries the enumeration of ~18 relationship types. The description only gestures at 'a version, an event, or another releasable item', which is looser than the schema allows — baseline 3 is right.

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?

States a specific verb and resource: put one item into an open review submission, and names the item kinds (version, event, other releasable item). It is clearly distinct from review_submissions__create and review_submission_items__update/delete, though it doesn't call them out by name.

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?

"One per call, so repeat it for each thing Apple should look at" gives explicit batching guidance, and "open review submission" implies the prerequisite state. It stops short of saying what an agent should do for update/delete after items exist.

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