lastscanned: Parcel & Ocean Container Tracking

Compare shipping rates

get_rates

Read-onlyIdempotent

Shipping prices for one parcel between two postal codes from USPS, UPS and FedEx, cheapest first, with delivery days and surcharges. Each quote names its source and rateType (retail, list, or a postage reseller's price). Quotes only: nothing is bought and no label is made. Sources that can't quote come back in errors.

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": {
      "from": "<from>",
      "to": "<to>",
      "weight": "<weight>"
    },
    "name": "get_rates"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`to`	Yes	Destination postal code, e.g. 10001
`from`	Yes	Origin postal code, e.g. 94107
`width`	No
`height`	No
`length`	No	Optional; give length, width and height together
`weight`	Yes	Parcel weight, in weight_unit
`carriers`	No	Only these carrier ids (see list_carriers). Omit for all.
`to_country`	No	Destination country, two letters (default US)
`residential`	No	Whether the destination is a home (default false)
`weight_unit`	No	Default lb
`from_country`	No	Origin country, two letters (default US)
`dimension_unit`	No	Default in

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`errors`	Yes
`notice`	No
`quotes`	Yes
`fastest`	No
`cheapest`	No
`quotedAt`	No
`credits_remaining`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

AddedNov 6, 2026

TDQS

A4.2/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive and open-world, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuine value beyond that: results are ordered cheapest first, each quote carries its source and a rateType distinguishing retail/list/reseller pricing, and failed sources surface in an errors collection rather than aborting the call.

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?

Three short sentences, front-loaded with the core output contract, then pricing taxonomy, then the read-only boundary. No filler words and every clause conveys information an agent would otherwise have to infer.

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?

With an output schema present, the description need not restate return fields, and it is complete for a 12-parameter read-only comparison tool whose annotations carry the safety profile. The one modest gap is that the description gives no hint about partial-failure semantics beyond 'errors', though that is arguably output-schema territory.

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 83%, so the schema already documents origin/destination postal codes, weight units, dimension units and the carriers filter. The description confirms the single-parcel scope and the three-source comparison but adds no argument-level detail such as country defaults or residential handling beyond what is already structured. Baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific resource and operation: shipping prices for one parcel between two postal codes, aggregated across USPS, UPS and FedEx, sorted cheapest first. The scope is tight enough that an agent can immediately distinguish it from siblings like list_carriers or track_package without opening the schema.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

Explicitly bounds the tool's scope with 'Quotes only: nothing is bought and no label is made,' which prevents an agent from assuming a purchase or label-creation path exists. It does not name a sibling or state when to prefer list_carriers first to discover carrier ids, though the schema covers that reference.

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

All lastscanned: Parcel & Ocean Container Tracking tools Inspect

Try in Browser

One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources

Need Help?