machship-mcp

Get Consignment Creation Settings

machship_get_consignment_creation_settings

Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieves the required fields and default values needed to create consignments for a company, so you can prepare valid shipment data before submission.

Instructions

Returns settings and defaults needed for creating consignments for a company (required fields, defaults, etc.).

Args:

companyId (number, optional): Company ID (defaults to authenticated company)

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`companyId`	No	Company ID (optional)

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 / companyId / 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

A3.6/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint and destructiveHint=false, so safety is covered. The description adds one useful behavioral detail beyond them: companyId defaults to the authenticated company. It does not say whether the defaults are carrier-dependent or how the settings change per company, which is the main behavioral question for this tool.

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?

Two short, front-loaded sentences with no padding; the purpose precedes the argument note. The trailing "etc." is mildly vague about what else is returned, but the structure is efficient overall.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be spelled out, and with a single optional parameter the description covers the invocation surface adequately. The only shortfall is the missing explicit link to the create-consignment tools, which matters given how many creation variants exist.

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

Parameters4/5

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

Schema coverage is 100% and the schema already labels companyId optional, but the description supplies meaning the schema lacks — that omitting it falls back to the authenticated company's context. That is a real invocation-relevant semantic addition, even if small.

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 ("Returns settings and defaults needed for creating consignments for a company") and enumerates what the payload contains (required fields, defaults). It is clearly distinguishable from the many machship_create_consignment* siblings because it is a read that feeds them, although it never names those siblings explicitly.

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 through the phrase "needed for creating consignments" — an agent can infer this is a pre-flight lookup, but the description does not say "call this before machship_create_consignment" or scope it to a specific creation flow. There are no exclusions or alternatives named.

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

Deploy Server