Skip to main content
Glama

Easypost

by io.github.pipeworx-io

Easypost Track

easypost_track
Read-onlyIdempotent

Track a package by tracking number — returns current status, carrier, estimated delivery date, and recent scan events. Example: easypost_track({ tracking_code: "9400100000000000000000", carrier: "USPS", _apiKey: "your-key" })

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
_apiKeyYesEasyPost API key (get one free at easypost.com)
carrierNoCarrier name (optional but recommended), e.g. "USPS", "UPS", "FedEx"
tracking_codeYesCarrier tracking number, e.g. "9400100000000000000000"

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / examples
      Added value: +[
+  {
+    "_apiKey": "your-easypost-api-key",
+    "carrier": "USPS",
+    "tracking_code": "9400100000000000000000"
+  }
+]
  2. First observed

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false. The description adds specific details about the return payload (current status, carrier, estimated delivery date, scan events), providing useful behavioral context beyond the annotations. No contradiction.

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?

Two sentences plus a short example. The first sentence states purpose and return fields. No filler, all content earns its place. Front-loaded with the most important information.

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?

For a read-only tracking tool with no output schema, the description covers what the tool returns (status, carrier, estimated delivery, scan events). Parameters are fully covered by schema. Could mention edge cases (e.g., invalid tracking code) but is sufficiently complete for common use.

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 coverage is 100% with each parameter having a description. The description adds an example call showing actual values and optionality of carrier. This is marginally helpful but does not significantly expand on the schema's documentation.

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 begins with a clear verb 'Track a package by tracking number' and specifies the resource (package) and input (tracking number). It lists return fields (status, carrier, estimated delivery date, recent scan events), distinguishing it from sibling 'easypost_rates' which handles rate lookups.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

The description provides an example call but no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., when needing tracking vs. rates). It does not state when not to use it or mention prerequisites beyond the API key.

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

All Easypost toolsInspect
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

A3.7/5.0
Disambiguation2/5

The ask_pipeworx family (stable, beta, grounded) are nearly identical, with beta explicitly matching stable, creating clear misselection risk. The five polymarket_* tools and several research tools (deep_research, bet_research, entity_profile) also overlap in purpose despite detailed descriptions.

Naming Consistency3/5

Tool names are mostly snake_case and readable, with consistent prefixes (ask_pipeworx_, polymarket_, easypost_), but mix verb-first (validate_claim, resolve_entity) and noun-first (entity_profile, ai_visibility_check) conventions. The server name 'Easypost' does not align with the overwhelmingly Pipeworx-focused tool set.

Tool Count2/5

33 tools is a heavy count, especially with three near-duplicate ask_pipeworx variants and many meta-tools. The set is also unfocused: only two shipping tools under an 'Easypost' label while the rest are a broad data-research and prediction-market platform, making the count feel bloated for the apparent scope.

Completeness2/5

As an Easypost server, shipping coverage is severely incomplete (rates and tracking only, no label purchase, address verification, or refunds). Within the Pipeworx tools, the cited pipeworx:// URIs have no direct fetch-by-URI tool, leaving a notable dead end for agents trying to retrieve full records.

Resources