machship-mcp

Get Item Label PDF

machship_get_item_label_pdf

Read-onlyIdempotent

Generate and return item or package labels for a consignment as a PDF, with optional A4 formatting, so you can print shipping labels directly.

Instructions

Returns item/package labels for a consignment as a PDF. Returns { fileBase64, contentType, sizeBytes }. contentType comes from the response header.

Args:

consignmentId (number): Consignment ID
printA4 (boolean, optional): Print in A4 format (default: label-size)

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`printA4`	No	Print in A4 format
`consignmentId`	Yes	Consignment 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 / 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"
+}

First observedv1.0.0Jun 12, 2026

TDQS

B3.3/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive and open-world, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds that the payload is a base64 PDF blob and that contentType is derived from the response header, which is useful runtime context, but says nothing about size limits, auth requirements, or whether all items in the consignment are returned.

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?

Front-loaded with purpose, followed by return shape and an Args block; no filler sentences. The Args list largely restates the schema, which is mild redundancy but keeps the definition self-contained.

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?

Purpose, parameters and a return shape are covered, and an output schema exists. However, for a tool with multiple ambiguous label-related siblings, the missing routing guidance leaves a real gap for an agent choosing among them.

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%, so the baseline is 3. The description goes beyond the schema by disclosing that printA4 defaults to 'label-size' when omitted, which is real semantic information an agent needs to reason about the output dimensions.

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 item/package labels for a consignment as a PDF'), which is clearly distinct from a consignment-level label. It does not name the closely related siblings (machship_get_consignment_label_pdf, machship_get_item_labels_zip, machship_get_item_pdf_file_info), so the differentiation is left to the 'item/package' vs 'consignment' wording.

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 explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance. With several near neighbours in the sibling list (item labels as a ZIP, item PDF file info, consignment label PDF, return item PDFs for consignments), the agent gets no signal about which one to pick for a given need.

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

Deploy Server