Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
machship-mcp

machship-mcp

by devkindhq
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

Get Available Routes

machship_get_routes
Read-only

Retrieves available freight routes and carrier services for a shipment request, returning rates and ETAs so you can compare carrier options before creating a consignment.

Instructions

Returns a list of available freight routes and carrier services for a single shipment request. Use this to find all carrier options (rates, ETAs) before creating a consignment.

Args:

  • request (object): Route request including:

    • companyId: Company ID (required)

    • fromLocation: { suburb, postcode, state, country } — origin location

    • toLocation: { suburb, postcode, state, country } — destination location

    • items: Array of packages with weight (kg), length/width/height (cm), name (string), quantity (integer > 0)

    • despatchDate (optional): Planned despatch date (ISO 8601)

Example: { "companyId": 1790, "fromLocation": { "suburb": "Melbourne", "postcode": "3000", "state": "VIC", "country": "AU" }, "toLocation": { "suburb": "Sydney", "postcode": "2000", "state": "NSW", "country": "AU" }, "items": [{ "weight": 10, "length": 30, "width": 30, "height": 30, "name": "Parcel", "quantity": 1 }] }

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
requestYesRoute request (companyId, from/to location, items with weight/dimensions, optional despatchDate)

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 / request / propertyNames
      Added value: +{
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • 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

A4.1/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, openWorldHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds that results are carrier options with rates and ETAs for a single shipment, but says nothing about error or empty-result behavior, rate-freshness caveats implied by idempotentHint=false, or response shape beyond the output schema.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Purpose and workflow guidance are front-loaded in two sentences, followed by a compact Args outline and one concrete example. Nothing is decorative, and the example earns its space because the schema does not type the nested request fields.

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

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given a nested-object parameter, annotated read-only behavior and an output schema, the definition covers what an agent needs to construct a valid request. It falls short only on failure/no-route handling and on disambiguating itself from the batch and complex-item route variants.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters5/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The input schema leaves the request object as an empty property bag with only a one-line summary, so the description is effectively the only source of field semantics. It documents companyId as required, the suburb/postcode/state/country shape of fromLocation and toLocation, item fields with explicit units (kg, cm), quantity > 0, and despatchDate as optional ISO 8601 — plus a worked example.

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 opens with a concrete verb+resource: 'Returns a list of available freight routes and carrier services for a single shipment request', and it clarifies the value of the result ('rates, ETAs'). The phrase 'single shipment request' implicitly separates it from the batch and complex-item route siblings, though it never names those siblings explicitly.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

It gives a clear usage context: 'Use this to find all carrier options (rates, ETAs) before creating a consignment', which tells the agent where this sits in the quoting-to-booking workflow. It does not say when to prefer machship_get_routes_batch or machship_get_routes_complex_items, so the alternative-selection guidance is incomplete.

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