Google Play MCP

list_listings

Lists store listing details (title, short and full descriptions, video) for every language of an app. Read-only, so you can review localized listings without changing them.

Instructions

List the store listing (title, shortDescription, fullDescription, video) for every language of an app. Read-only.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "packageName": "<packageName>"
    },
    "name": "list_listings"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`editId`	No	Optional: read from this open edit (to see uncommitted changes). Without it a temporary edit is opened and deleted.
`packageName`	Yes	Application id (package name), e.g. com.example.app

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Nov 10, 2026

TDQS

A3.6/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the behavioral load; it does disclose 'Read-only', which is the single most important trait for a listing fetch. However, it omits notable side effects that the schema reveals – that without editId a temporary edit is opened and deleted – and says nothing about permissions or what happens when no listings exist.

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?

Two short sentences, zero filler, with the resource scope and returned fields front-loaded and the safety trait stated last. Nothing repeats the name or title wastefully.

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 2-parameter read tool with full schema coverage and no output schema, the description gives enough: what is listed, per-language scope, the field set returned, and the read-only guarantee. The only gap is that the hidden temporary-edit behavior is not surfaced in prose, which matters slightly since there is no output schema to clarify side effects.

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 both packageName and editId are already fully documented, including the temporary-edit fallback. The description's enumeration of returned fields adds return-side value but no meaning beyond the input schema, so baseline 3 applies.

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 ('List the store listing') and names the exact fields returned (title, shortDescription, fullDescription, video) scoped to 'every language of an app'. It is clearly a read of listings, which implicitly separates it from bulk_upsert_listings and delete_listing, though it never names those siblings to make the distinction explicit.

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?

Usage is only implied by 'for every language of an app' and 'Read-only' – an agent can infer this is the read path for listings, but there is no explicit statement of when to prefer it over bulk_upsert_listings (read-vs-write) or delete_listing, and no prerequisites are mentioned. The important context about reading uncommitted changes via editId lives only in the schema, not the description.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

Deploy Server