printify_get_orderGet a single order's full details, including shipments (carrier + tracking numbers). Printify REST: GET /v1/shops/{shop_id}/orders/{order_id}.json.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| shop_id | Yes | Shop id — required. | |
| order_id | Yes | Order id — required. |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
Input schema / $schemaPrevious value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"New value: +"https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema"Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so safety is covered. The description adds value beyond that by naming a concrete part of the returned payload ('shipments' with carrier and tracking numbers) and by citing the underlying REST path, which signals this is the canonical single-order fetch.
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 compact sentences, front-loaded with the outcome and followed by the API mapping. Nothing is padded and each sentence carries information.
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?
With only two fully documented parameters and no output schema, the definition is nearly self-sufficient; it even hints at the shipment fields returned. It stops short of describing the full response shape, which matters given there is no output schema.
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% with both parameters (shop_id, order_id) documented and marked required. The description adds no format or constraint detail beyond the schema, so the baseline 3 is appropriate.
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 states a specific verb (Get) and resource (a single order's full details), and 'single' implicitly contrasts with the sibling printify_list_orders. It does not explicitly name that sibling, so the differentiation is inferred rather than stated.
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 only implied: the tool is called when a specific order_id plus shop_id are in hand. There is no explicit when-to-use statement and no routing guidance relative to printify_list_orders for the case where the order id is unknown.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.