Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
machship-mcp

machship-mcp

by devkindhq
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

Edit Company Location

machship_edit_company_location

Update an existing company location in Machship by providing its ID and fields to change, enabling accurate freight management data.

Instructions

Edits an existing company location.

Args:

  • location (object): Updated location data including id and any fields to update

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "location": "<location>"
    },
    "name": "machship_edit_company_location"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
locationYesUpdated location data including id

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
errorsNoValidation errors returned by Machship, if any
objectNoResponse payload from the Machship API

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changedv1.0.1
    • addedInput schema / properties / location / propertyNames
      Added value: +{
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "$schema": "http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#",
+  "additionalProperties": {},
+  "properties": {
+    "errors": {
+      "anyOf": [
+        {
+          "items": {},
+          "type": "array"
+        },
+        {
+          "type": "null"
+        }
+      ],
+      "description": "Validation errors returned by Machship, if any"
+    },
+    "object": {
+      "description": "Response payload from the Machship API"
+    }
+  },
+  "type": "object"
+}
  2. First observedv1.0.0

TDQS

C2.8/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=false, and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered structurally. Beyond that the description adds only 'any fields to update', which hints at partial-update semantics but never states whether omitted fields are preserved or cleared, nor what the response contains. For a mutation tool this is thin.

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

Conciseness3/5

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

Very short and front-loaded with the action, which is good, but the 'Args:' boilerplate restates the schema signature rather than adding information. The brevity here reads as under-specification rather than disciplined conciseness.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness2/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

The tool takes a nested, unconstrained object, and the description never explains which location fields are editable or how to discover them (e.g. via machship_get_company_location). An output schema exists, so return values need not be described, but the input side is materially incomplete for a mutation of a complex nested payload.

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 nominally 100%, but the single parameter is a freeform object with additionalProperties {} and no documented properties, so the schema itself carries almost no field-level meaning. The description contributes the two key facts — an id is required and only changed fields need to be supplied — which is real added value, but it does not list valid fields or point to a source for them.

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: 'Edits an existing company location.' An agent can tell it mutates a location entity rather than creating or fetching one. However, it never distinguishes itself from siblings like machship_create_company_location or machship_get_company_location beyond the verb, leaving the sibling boundary implicit.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

There is no when-to-use guidance, no mention of alternatives such as machship_create_company_location for new records, and no prerequisites or permissions noted. The agent must infer that this is the update path simply from the verb 'Edits'.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools