machship-mcp

Upload Attachments

machship_upload_attachments

Attach documents to existing Machship consignments by uploading one or more Base64-encoded files with optional attachment type IDs.

Instructions

Uploads one or more attachments to Machship.

Args:

attachments (array): Array of attachment objects. Each object should contain:
- consignmentId (number): Consignment to attach to
- fileName (string): File name with extension
- fileBase64 (string): Base64-encoded file content
- attachmentTypeId (number, optional): Type of attachment

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": {
      "attachments": "<attachments>"
    },
    "name": "machship_upload_attachments"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`attachments`	Yes	Attachments to upload

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.

Changed5 schema fields changedv1.0.1Nov 3, 2026

removedInput schema / properties / attachments / items / additionalProperties
```
Removed value: -false
```
addedInput schema / properties / attachments / items / properties / attachmentTypeId / maximum
```
Added value: +9007199254740991
```
addedInput schema / properties / attachments / items / properties / attachmentTypeId / minimum
```
Added value: +-9007199254740991
```
addedInput schema / properties / attachments / items / properties / consignmentId / 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

B3.2/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

The annotations already declare that this is a non-read-only, non-idempotent, non-destructive operation, and the description is consistent with that. It adds that multiple attachments can be uploaded and tied to consignments, but it does not cover permissions, file size limits, duplicate-handling behavior, or other operational constraints.

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 description is short and front-loads the core action before listing the attachment object shape. The Args section repeats schema information, but it remains readable and does not contain unnecessary prose.

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 the simple one-parameter shape, complete schema coverage, rich annotations, and the presence of an output schema, the description provides enough information to invoke the tool correctly. It could still mention prerequisites such as the target consignment needing to exist, but that is a minor gap.

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 the attachment object fields. The description mirrors the schema's field meanings without adding format details, constraints, or examples beyond what is already structured.

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: uploading one or more attachments to Machship. It is clearly distinct from retrieval tools like get_attachment, but it does not explicitly differentiate itself from other upload-related siblings such as upload_commercial_invoice.

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?

The description explains what the tool does but gives no guidance on when to use it, when not to use it, or which alternative attachment tool to choose. The usage context is only implied by the tool name and action.

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

Deploy Server