CargoMind MCP Server

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

update_shipment_status

Change a shipment's status and log a history event, such as delayed, delivered, or exception, so logistics tracking stays accurate.

Instructions

Change a shipment's status and log a history event (e.g. mark delayed, delivered, exception).

Args:
    shipment_id: Shipment ID such as "SHP-1002".
    status: New status: created, picked_up, in_transit, delayed, out_for_delivery, delivered or exception.
    city: Optional city where the update happened (defaults to the current/destination city).
    note: Short human-readable reason, e.g. "Rain on NH-48, 6h delay". Stored as the shipment note.

Returns:
    {"status": "ok", "previous_status": ..., "shipment": {...}, "event": {...}} or an error with valid values.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`city`	No
`note`	No
`status`	Yes
`shipment_id`	Yes

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Oct 17, 2026

TDQS

A4.1/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does reasonably well: it discloses a side effect beyond the status change (a history event is logged), specifies that the note is persisted as the shipment note, and that invalid input returns an error listing valid values. It stops short of stating permissions, reversibility, or idempotency, which matters for a mutation tool.

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 one-line purpose is front-loaded, and the Args/Returns block is tightly formatted with one line per parameter and no filler. Every sentence carries information an agent needs to invoke the tool correctly.

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 four-parameter mutation tool with no annotations, the definition covers purpose, all parameters, the side effect, and the return shape, so an agent has what it needs. The only gap is the absence of any explicit routing guidance against the many read-oriented sibling tools.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters5/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate and it does: it documents all four parameters with an ID format example ('SHP-1002'), the complete closed set of valid status values (absent from the schema, which has no enums), and the default behavior of city when omitted.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb and resource ('Change a shipment's status') and adds the important side effect that a history event is logged, which an agent cannot infer from the name alone. It does not explicitly differentiate itself from siblings such as track_shipment or shipment_history, but the mutation-plus-audit purpose is unambiguous.

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?

Usage is implied rather than stated: the examples ('mark delayed, delivered, exception') show the intended scenario, but there is no explicit when-to-use vs sibling guidance (e.g. vs track_shipment, which appears read-only) and no stated prerequisites or exclusions.

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

Deploy Server