Download a specific certificate or provisioning profile from App Store Connect to a new local file with secure permissions, without overwriting existing paths.
Download one exact certificate or provisioning profile to a new approved local file with mode 0600. Raw contents never appear in the MCP response and existing paths are never overwritten.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| id | Yes | ||
| family | Yes | ||
| destination | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
It discloses multiple non-obvious behaviors beyond annotations: local file with mode 0600, never overwrites existing paths, and raw contents never appear in the MCP response. These are key operational constraints that annotations do not provide.
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?
Two sentences, no filler; the core purpose is front-loaded and the essential constraints are appended succinctly.
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 write tool with no output schema, the description should state what the response contains. It only says raw contents do not appear, leaving the success/error output format unclear, and the term 'approved' is ambiguous.
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?
With schema coverage at 0%, the description compensates by mapping 'certificate or provisioning profile' to family, 'one exact' to id, and 'new approved local file' / 'never overwritten' to destination. However, it does not address validation details or error cases.
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?
The description clearly states a specific action: download one exact certificate or provisioning profile to a local file with mode 0600. This is sufficiently singular and detailed to distinguish it from sibling planning/listing/get tools, even without naming them.
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?
There is no mention of when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor any scenario or prerequisite. The description only states what it does, not why/when to choose it over sibling tools.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.