machship-mcp

Get Attachment POD Report

machship_get_attachment_pod_report

Read-onlyIdempotent

Downloads a Proof of Delivery (POD) report by attachment ID, including attachment and consignment details for delivery verification.

Instructions

Downloads a Proof of Delivery (POD) report that includes attachment and consignment details. Returns { fileBase64, contentType, sizeBytes }. contentType comes from the response header.

Args:

id (number): Attachment ID

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`id`	Yes	Attachment ID

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`errors`	No	Validation errors returned by Machship, if any
`object`	No	Response payload from the Machship API

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed2 schema fields changedv1.0.1Nov 3, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / id / maximum
```
Added value: +9007199254740991
```

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"
+}

First observedv1.0.0Jun 12, 2026

TDQS

A3.5/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the returned shape and the detail that contentType comes from the response header, but says nothing about size limits, base64 encoding overhead, or failure modes when a POD is unavailable for a consignment.

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?

The purpose sentence is front-loaded and short, and the return shape is stated compactly. The trailing 'Args' block duplicates the schema field it already documents, which is mild redundancy but not bloat.

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 one-parameter, read-only download tool with a full output schema and complete annotations, the description covers what it does, what it takes, and what it returns. The only meaningful gap is guidance on missing/invalid POD documents.

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?

With a single required parameter at 100% schema coverage, the baseline is 3, and the description only restates 'id (number): Attachment ID' verbatim from the schema. It adds no meaning such as which attachment types qualify as POD reports or how to obtain a valid ID.

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?

The description names a specific verb ('Downloads') and a specific artifact ('Proof of Delivery (POD) report'), plus the scope ('includes attachment and consignment details'). This clearly separates it from generic attachment readers like machship_get_attachment or machship_get_consignment_attachments, though it never names a sibling to sharpen the distinction.

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 only implied: an agent can infer you call this when you need a POD document for a known attachment ID. There is no explicit when-to-use, no exclusion, and no mention of what to do if the attachment is not a POD or no POD exists.

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

Deploy Server