Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
machship-mcp

machship-mcp

by devkindhq
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

Get Pending Consignments by Reference 1

machship_get_pending_consignments_by_reference1
Read-onlyIdempotent

Finds pending consignments by Reference 1 values, returning up to 10 matches per request.

Instructions

Finds pending consignments by Reference 1 field. Max 10 per request.

Args:

  • references (string[]): Reference 1 values (max 10)

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": {
      "references": "<references>"
    },
    "name": "machship_get_pending_consignments_by_reference1"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
referencesYesReference 1 values (max 10)

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

B3.4/5.0
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 one genuinely useful constraint ('Max 10 per request'), but it does not say what happens when more than 10 references are supplied (error vs. truncation) or whether matching is exact or partial, and an output schema exists so return-shape disclosure isn't required.

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?

The core purpose and the 10-item limit are front-loaded in a single short sentence, and the document is brief. The trailing Args block largely duplicates the schema, which is minor waste but not damaging.

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?

For a single-parameter read tool with rich annotations and an output schema, the definition covers the essentials plus the batch limit. It is still thin on edge behavior — no-match results, batch overflow, and matching semantics — which matter for an agent deciding how to call it.

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 schema for 'references' already reads 'Reference 1 values (max 10)' — the description's Args block repeats this almost verbatim. No additional semantics (case sensitivity, whitespace handling, exact vs. fuzzy matching) are added, so the high-coverage 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 states a specific verb and resource ('Finds pending consignments') and names the lookup key ('Reference 1 field'), which distinguishes it from siblings such as machship_get_consignments_by_reference1 (non-pending) and machship_get_pending_consignments_by_reference2. It never explicitly contrasts with those siblings, so it stops short of a 5.

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 by the name and the phrase 'Finds pending consignments by Reference 1 field'. There is no explicit when-to-use guidance, no mention of when to prefer get_pending_consignments_by_ids or the reference2 variant, and no statement about what to do if the caller has more than 10 references.

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