Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
machship-mcp

machship-mcp

by devkindhq
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

Get Available Routes (Batch)

machship_get_routes_batch
Read-only

Retrieve available routes for multiple shipment requests in one call to support bulk rate shopping and compare carrier options across shipments.

Instructions

Returns available routes for multiple shipment requests in a single call. Efficient for bulk rate shopping across multiple shipments.

Args:

  • requests (array): Array of route request objects (same structure as single route request)

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
requestsYesArray of route requests

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 / requests / items / 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

B3.4/5.0
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 the batch/efficiency rationale but omits batch-specific behavior an agent needs: whether one invalid request fails the whole call, whether partial results are returned, and any size or rate limits.

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 purpose and efficiency rationale are front-loaded in two short sentences, followed by a compact Args block. The Args line largely restates the schema property description, so it is slightly redundant but not wasteful.

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 cover safety, so the description needn't explain returns. However, for a batch fan-out tool the agent still lacks per-request failure semantics and any cap on array length, which are the main things that affect correct invocation.

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 coverage is 100% and there is only one parameter, so baseline is 3. The note that each element has 'the same structure as single route request' does add real meaning, since the schema types items as an unconstrained object, but it points to an unnamed sibling rather than describing the fields.

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 ('Returns available routes') plus the batching scope ('for multiple shipment requests in a single call'), which separates it from the singular sibling machship_get_routes. It does not name that sibling explicitly, so the differentiation is implied rather than stated.

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?

'Efficient for bulk rate shopping across multiple shipments' implies the batch scenario where this tool beats the single-request version. There is no explicit when-not guidance (e.g. when a single route call is preferable) and no prerequisite or limit information.

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