machship-mcp

Rebook Manifest Pickup

machship_rebook_manifest_pickup

Rebooks a carrier pickup for an existing manifest when a pickup is missed or the schedule changes, using the manifest ID and new pickup datetime.

Instructions

Rebooks the carrier pickup for an existing manifest (e.g. missed pickup or changed schedule).

Args:

rebooking (object): Rebooking details including manifestId and new pickup datetime

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`rebooking`	Yes	Rebooking details (manifestId, pickupDate, etc.)

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 / rebooking / 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"
+}

First observedv1.0.0Jun 12, 2026

TDQS

A3.6/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare the mutation profile (readOnly=false, destructive=false, idempotent=false, openWorld=true). The description adds only that the manifest must already exist, and omits what actually happens to the original pickup, whether retries risk duplicate rebookings given idempotent=false, or any carrier-side side effects.

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 sentence is front-loaded and wastes no words. The follow-on 'Args' block largely duplicates the schema description, which is minor redundancy rather than harm.

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?

With annotations covering the safety profile and an output schema covering the return value, the description supplies the essential purpose and trigger conditions. It is only marginally incomplete on non-idempotent retry consequences and the fate of the prior pickup.

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%, so the schema already documents the single 'rebooking' object and its example fields. The description's 'manifestId and new pickup datetime' roughly restates that, adding little beyond what is structured, and the free-form additionalProperties object leaves field requirements unclear in both places.

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: 'Rebooks the carrier pickup for an existing manifest', which an agent can distinguish from manifest creation (machship_manifest_consignments) and permanent pickup tools. It does not name a sibling explicitly, so it falls just short of full differentiation.

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?

The parenthetical 'e.g. missed pickup or changed schedule' gives concrete triggering scenarios, which is more than most siblings offer. It provides no when-not guidance (e.g. vs. machship_add_permanent_pickups for recurring pickups), so the agent must infer exclusions.

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

Deploy Server