app-publish-mcp

google_update_details

Update Google Play app listing details for a given edit: set default language, support email, phone, and website.

Instructions

Update app details (default language, contact email/phone/website)

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>",
      "editId": "<editId>"
    },
    "name": "google_update_details"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`editId`	Yes	Edit ID
`packageName`	Yes	Android package name
`contactEmail`	No	User-visible support email
`contactPhone`	No	User-visible support phone number
`contactWebsite`	No	User-visible website URL
`defaultLanguage`	No	Default language code in BCP 47 format (e.g. en-US)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.3.1Mar 19, 2026

TDQS

B3.1/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears full burden. It only says 'Update' implying mutation, but does not disclose requirements (permissions, edit ID management), reversibility, or side effects on unchanged fields.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is very short and front-loaded, containing no unnecessary words. However, it could be slightly more informative without sacrificing conciseness.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness2/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the tool is part of an edit workflow with 6 parameters and no output schema, the description lacks critical context about the required editId lifecycle and that changes are not committed until google_commit_edit is called.

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 clear parameter descriptions. The description repeats the field names but does not add deeper semantics beyond grouping them as 'app details'. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 tool updates app details and lists specific fields (default language, contact email/phone/website). It distinguishes from sibling tools like google_update_listing which update store listing details.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

No when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance is provided. The description does not mention that an edit must be created first and changes committed later, nor does it contrast with similar update tools like google_update_listing.

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

Deploy Server