machship-mcp

Get Posted Financial Invoices

machship_get_posted_invoices

Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieve posted financial invoices with optional ISO 8601 date filters and pagination to review or reconcile invoice records within a date range.

Instructions

Returns posted financial invoices within an optional date range (max 100 per call).

Args:

startDate (string, optional): Start date filter (ISO 8601)
endDate (string, optional): End date filter (ISO 8601)
startIndex (number, optional): Pagination start index (default 1)
retrieveSize (number, optional): Number to retrieve (default 100, max 100)

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "machship_get_posted_invoices"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`endDate`	No	End date filter (ISO 8601)
`startDate`	No	Start date filter (ISO 8601)
`startIndex`	No	Pagination start index (default 1)
`retrieveSize`	No	Number of results to return (default 100, max 100)

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.

Changed4 schema fields changedv1.0.1Nov 3, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / retrieveSize / description

Added value: +"Number of results to return (default 100, max 100)"

addedInput schema / properties / startIndex / description
```
Added value: +"Pagination start index (default 1)"
```
addedInput schema / properties / startIndex / 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

B3.1/5.0

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 operational behavior the annotations do not: a 100-per-call cap and pagination controls. It says nothing about default ordering, what 'posted' means in lifecycle terms, or whether date filters are inclusive.

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 one-line summary is well front-loaded and earns its place. The Args block, however, is pure duplication of schema descriptions and consumes most of the description's length 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 and annotations are rich, so the burden is light, and the pagination cap is a genuinely useful addition. Still, for an open-world list tool with four sibling invoice tools, the absence of any disambiguation or result-ordering context leaves an agent under-informed about when to pick this tool.

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 the schema already documents all four parameters including defaults and bounds. The Args block restates the schema text nearly verbatim (it even omits the schema's maximum/minimum on retrieveSize) and adds no format or edge-case guidance such as inclusive-date semantics or how startIndex interacts with date filters.

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 posted financial invoices') plus a scope constraint (optional date range, max 100 per call). It does not name or differentiate itself from near-siblings such as machship_get_carrier_invoices or machship_get_invoice_by_document_number, so an agent must infer which invoice surface it wants.

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?

No when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance is given, and the crowded sibling set contains at least two other invoice retrieval tools. The description never indicates that this is for posted/financial invoices as opposed to carrier invoices or single-document lookups.

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

Deploy Server