list_buildsRetrieve recent builds for an App Store Connect app with their processing state, so you can find VALID builds ready for TestFlight or release.
List recent builds for an app with processing state (VALID = ready to use). Pro feature.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| limit | No | Max builds (default 10, max 50) | |
| app_id | Yes | App Store Connect app ID |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so safety is covered. The description adds two pieces of genuinely useful context beyond that: results carry a processing state with 'VALID = ready to use', and the tool is a 'Pro feature', alerting the agent to a possible access/entitlement restriction.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
A single compact sentence with the operation front-loaded and no wasted words; the parenthetical state hint and 'Pro feature' note each earn their place.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
For a simple read-only list tool with no output schema, the description covers purpose, the meaning of the key returned state, and the Pro gating. It omits return ordering and pagination behavior relative to the 'limit' cap, keeping it just short of fully complete.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema coverage is 100% and both parameters (app_id, limit) are documented in the schema itself. The description adds no syntax or format detail beyond what the schema provides, so the baseline 3 is correct.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
States a clear verb+resource ('List recent builds for an app') and adds a scoping qualifier ('recent') plus what the results contain ('processing state'). An agent can tell it apart from mutation siblings like wait_for_build or attach_build, but no sibling is named explicitly, so it lands at 4 rather than 5.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The phrase 'for an app' implies the listing use case, but there is no explicit when-to-use vs when-not-to-use guidance and no routing to alternatives such as wait_for_build for polling a single build. Usage is only implied.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.