Skip to main content
Glama

get_order_delivery

Retrieve detailed delivery information including logistic status, tracking number, and recipient address to track packages and handle delivery inquiries.

Instructions

取得單一配送單的完整資訊,包含物流狀態、追蹤編號及收件地址。

【用途】 查詢特定出貨單的配送狀態與物流詳情,適用於追蹤包裹、確認收件資料, 或協助客服處理配送相關問題。配送單 ID 通常來自 get_order_detail 回傳的 出貨資訊(shipments / deliveries 欄位)。

【呼叫的 Shopline API】

  • GET /v1/order_deliveries/{delivery_id}

【回傳結構】 dict 包含:

  • id:配送單 ID

  • status:配送狀態(如 pending, shipped, delivered)

  • tracking_number:物流追蹤編號

  • tracking_url:物流追蹤連結

  • carrier:物流商名稱

  • shipping_address:收件地址(含姓名、電話、地址欄位)

  • line_items[]:出貨品項(商品名稱、數量)

  • created_at, updated_at

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
delivery_idYes配送單 ID(通常由訂單明細中的 delivery_id 欄位取得)
Behavior3/5

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It describes the tool as a read operation ('取得完整資訊') and references the API endpoint. It does not mention side effects, auth, rate limits, or error conditions, which could be more explicit.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Description is well-structured with sections (purpose, API, response). Each sentence adds value, though it is longer than necessary. Front-loaded with main purpose.

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?

The tool has one parameter and no output schema; the description compensates by detailing the return fields (id, status, tracking, address, line_items, timestamps). It covers usage context adequately. Could mention error scenarios.

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 a clear description of delivery_id. The description adds context that ID comes from get_order_detail, but no further parameter details beyond what schema already provides.

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?

Description clearly states the tool retrieves complete delivery info including status, tracking number, and address. It specifies it's for a single delivery, distinguishing it from list tools and update tools like update_order_delivery.

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 【用途】 section explains when to use: tracking packages, confirming recipient info, customer service. It mentions delivery_id comes from get_order_detail. However, it does not explicitly exclude alternative tools or state when not to use it.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/asgard-ai-platform/mcp-shopline'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server