Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
machship-mcp

machship-mcp

by devkindhq
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

Get Financial Invoice by Document Number

machship_get_invoice_by_document_number
Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieve a specific financial invoice using its document number, with optional PDF download included as base64 bytes in the response.

Instructions

Returns a specific financial invoice by document number, with optional PDF download.

Args:

  • documentNumber (string): Invoice document number

  • returnPdfFileBytes (boolean, optional): Include PDF as base64 bytes in response

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": {
      "documentNumber": "<documentNumber>"
    },
    "name": "machship_get_invoice_by_document_number"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
documentNumberYesInvoice document number
returnPdfFileBytesNoInclude PDF as base64 bytes

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. Changed1 schema field changedv1.0.1
    • 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

B3.2/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the notable behavioral detail that the call can embed a PDF as base64 bytes, but does not flag the resulting payload size or what happens when the document number is not found.

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?

One front-loaded sentence states the operation and the optional PDF behavior, followed by a short Args list. The Args block is somewhat redundant with the fully documented schema, but nothing is bloated.

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?

The tool is simple (two params) and has an output schema, so return values need not be described. However, with many invoice-adjacent siblings in the namespace, the definition omits routing guidance and error behavior, leaving real gaps for an agent choosing between invoice 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%, so both parameters are already documented in the schema, and the description's Args block largely restates them. It adds no extra semantics such as where the document number originates or what happens if returnPdfFileBytes is omitted.

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 a specific financial invoice') plus the lookup key ('by document number'), which is enough to distinguish it from list-style siblings like machship_get_posted_invoices or machship_get_carrier_invoices. It falls short of 5 because it never names those siblings explicitly as the alternative for listing invoices.

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 guidance on when to use this versus the other invoice-related siblings, nor any prerequisite (e.g., invoice must already exist / be posted). Usage is only implied by 'by document number'.

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