Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
machship-mcp

machship-mcp

by devkindhq
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

Get Consignment PDF File Info

machship_get_consignment_pdf_file_info
Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieves a consignment label PDF as JSON by consignment ID, returning base64 content with fileName and contentType.

Instructions

Returns the consignment label PDF as JSON. object.content holds the file as base64, with object.fileName and object.contentType.

Args:

  • consignmentId (number): Consignment ID

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
consignmentIdYesConsignment 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 / consignmentId / 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"
+}
  2. First observedv1.0.0

TDQS

B3.4/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already establish read-only, idempotent, non-destructive behavior, so the description is not required to carry the safety profile. It does add the useful behavioral detail that the payload is base64-encoded rather than a binary stream, but it says nothing about size limits, rate limits, or what happens for a consignment without a label.

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?

The opening sentence is front-loaded and earns its place, but the trailing 'Args' block duplicates the input schema verbatim and adds no information. Removing it would lose nothing and would sharpen the definition.

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 single-parameter read tool with a full output schema and rich annotations, the description supplies the one thing the schema does not make obvious: that the file arrives as base64 inside object.content. What remains missing is disambiguation from the sibling PDF-retrieval tools.

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 description coverage is 100% for the single parameter, so the schema already defines consignmentId as a positive integer. The 'Args' block merely restates 'consignmentId (number): Consignment ID' without adding format, sourcing, or example detail, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 and resource ('Returns the consignment label PDF') and qualifies the format ('as JSON'), which implicitly contrasts with the binary-label siblings like machship_get_consignment_label_pdf. It stops short of naming that alternative explicitly, so the differentiation is inferential rather than stated.

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?

The 'as JSON / base64' framing implies when this tool is preferable to a raw-PDF sibling, but there is no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance and no sibling is named. The agent must infer the selection rule from the output-format hint alone.

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