List all app info localizations to retrieve an app's localized name and subtitle; automatically resolves the current non-replaced app info.
List all app info localizations (localized app name/subtitle) for an app. Resolves the current (non-REPLACED) app info automatically.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| appId | Yes | The ID of the app | |
| limit | No | Maximum number of localizations to return (default: 100) |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.1.3Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It usefully discloses one non-obvious trait — that it auto-resolves the current (non-REPLACED) app info rather than requiring an app info ID, and that REPLACED records are excluded. It says nothing about read-only safety, result ordering, or pagination behavior beyond the schema's limit.
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 short sentences, zero waste, with the core action and resource front-loaded and the auto-resolution caveat following immediately after.
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 two-parameter read tool with no output schema, the description covers the action, the returned content, and the implicit app-info resolution. Remaining gaps (ordering, whether results can span multiple app infos) are minor but not fully closed.
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 description coverage is 100% for both parameters, so the schema already documents appId and the limit range/default. The description adds no syntax, format, or ID-source detail beyond what the schema provides, so the baseline 3 applies.
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 specific verb and resource ('List all app info localizations') and clarifies the content in parentheses ('localized app name/subtitle'), which is what separates it from sibling list_app_store_version_localizations (version-level strings like description/keywords). An agent can pick between the two localization listers without opening either schema.
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?
Usage is implied by 'for an app' and the note that the current app info is resolved automatically, so the caller knows no appInfoId is needed. However, it never explicitly states when to use this versus list_app_store_version_localizations or get_app_info, and offers no exclusions or prerequisites.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.