Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
machship-mcp

machship-mcp

by devkindhq
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

Get Consignments by Pending Consignment IDs (Batch)

machship_get_consignments_by_pending_ids
Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieves details for up to 100 consignments using pending consignment IDs, enabling multiple shipment lookups in one request.

Instructions

Get consignment details for multiple consignments using Pending Consignment IDs as the lookup. Maximum of 100 consignments per request.

Args:

  • ids (number[]): Array of pending consignment IDs (max 100)

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idsYesPending consignment IDs (max 100)

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 / ids / items / 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

B3.3/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, openWorldHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description's only added behavioral fact is the 100-consignment cap, which is already expressed by maxItems in the schema; it says nothing about partial results, missing/invalid IDs, or ordering. With annotations carrying the burden, this is adequate but 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?

The prose is short and front-loaded, but the 100-item maximum is stated three times (twice in the description, once in the schema) and the 'Args:' block duplicates the schema verbatim. The repetition costs space without adding information.

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

Completeness3/5

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 explained, and the tool is a simple one-parameter batch read. However, the definition never clarifies what a 'pending' consignment ID is versus a regular consignment ID or what happens when IDs are not found, which is the main ambiguity an agent would face.

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% and the single parameter already documents 'Pending consignment IDs (max 100)' plus minItems/maxItems constraints. The description restates the same cap without adding format, ordering, or error semantics, so baseline 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?

States a specific verb ('Get consignment details'), resource ('consignments'), and lookup key ('Pending Consignment IDs'), which meaningfully distinguishes it from machship_get_consignments_by_ids and the single-record machship_get_consignment_by_pending_id. It does not name those siblings explicitly, so differentiation is inferable 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?

Usage is implied by the batch framing and the 100-item cap, but there is no explicit guidance on when to use this versus machship_get_consignment_by_pending_id for a single ID or machship_get_consignments_by_ids for already-created consignments. No prerequisites or exclusions are given.

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