ActionShip by Teapplix Demo

Purchase Shipping Label

teapplix_purchase_label

Destructive

Purchase a standalone shipping label. Does not require an existing Teapplix order. Label bytes are base64-encoded inside LabelData[]; additional carrier documents (customs forms, return slips) are in DocumentsData[]. [DEMO]

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`To`	Yes	Destination address: {Name, Company, Street, Street2, City, State, ZipCode, CountryCode, Phone}.
`From`	Yes	Ship-from address OR a saved shipping profile — supply exactly one shape.
`Options`	No	Advanced, rarely used. Omit unless the user explicitly requests features such as signature confirmation, insurance type, COD, etc.
`IsReturn`	No	true = generate a return label.
`Packages`	Yes	One or more packages to ship. The first entry is the main package; additional entries are extra packages. All packages must use the same carrier.
`ShipDate`	No	Ship date (YYYY-MM-DD). Defaults to today. Interpreted as Pacific timezone.
`ImageFormat`	No	Label image format override.
`ClientRequestId`	Yes	Unique client-generated ID for idempotency. Re-sending with the same ID returns the existing label.
`CustomsDeclaration`	No	International shipments only. Omit unless shipping outside the domestic country. Fields: ReasonForExport, IOssNumber, Items: [{Description, Quantity, Value, Weight, HSTariffNumber, CountryOfOrigin}].

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`Status`	No
`LabelData`	No	Label bytes; one entry per package. Content is base64-encoded.
`TrackingInfo`	No
`DocumentsData`	No	Additional documents (customs forms, return slips, etc.).
`PostageAmount`	No
`ClientRequestId`	No

TDQS

A4.2/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already convey non-read-only, destructive, and non-idempotent behavior, lowering the burden on the description. The description adds valuable context about the response structure (LabelData for label bytes, DocumentsData for additional carrier documents) and the [DEMO] marker, giving the agent insight into what to expect from the output.

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?

The description is brief and front-loaded with the action ('Purchase'), followed by the key differentiator and output format. Every sentence adds distinct value, and the [DEMO] marker is a concise extra note. No fluff or redundancy.

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?

Given the tool's complexity (9 params, nested objects, output schema present), the description provides the essential context: standalone use, response structure, and demo status. The rich schema handles parameter details, and the annotations provide safety behavior. A warning about costs or non-refundability could improve it, but the combination of schema, annotations, and description is largely complete.

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?

The schema has 100% documentation coverage, so the baseline is 3. The description adds no parameter-specific meaning beyond what the schema already provides; however, it does not need to, as the schema descriptions are exhaustive. The mention of LabelData/DocumentsData relates to output, not input parameters.

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 uses a specific verb ('Purchase') and resource ('shipping label'), clearly distinguishing it as a standalone label purchase. It explicitly notes that no existing Teapplix order is required, which differentiates it from teapplix_purchase_label_for_order and other siblings.

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?

The description clearly states when to use this tool: for standalone labels without an existing order. It does not explicitly name alternatives (e.g., teapplix_purchase_label_for_order), but the sibling name and the 'standalone' qualifier imply the distinction. No exclusions or prerequisites are mentioned, but the key context is provided.

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

All ActionShip by Teapplix Demo tools Inspect

Try in Browser

RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A3.9/5.0

Disambiguation4/5

Most tools have clearly distinct purposes (orders, labels, rates, zones, profiles). A few name pairs like manage_tag vs manage_order_tags and set_order_ship_options vs update_order could be confused, but the descriptions explicitly clarify when to use each.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tools share the teapplix_ prefix and follow a consistent verb_noun pattern (e.g., get_orders, create_order, purchase_label, validate_address). The only deviation is the bare 'help' tool, which is conventional and does not disrupt the pattern.

Tool Count4/5

At 28 tools, the server is slightly over the ideal 3-15 range, but the breadth of shipping operations (orders, labels, rates, manifests, tracking, configuration) justifies the count. It is not bloated.

Completeness5/5

The tool surface covers the full order-to-shipping lifecycle: order create/update/retrieve, splitting/merging, label purchase and cancellation, rate quotes, tracking, manifesting, address validation, 3PL submission, and configuration (profiles, warehouses, queues, tags). No significant gaps are apparent.

Resources

Need Help?