starshipit-mcp

Print Shipping Labels (Bulk)

starshipit_print_labels

Print shipping labels for multiple StarShipIt orders in one API call, returning label URLs, tracking numbers, carrier, and service per order. Supports reprinting existing labels.

Instructions

Print shipping labels for multiple orders at once in StarShipIt.

When to use: Use this tool when you need to generate carrier labels for two or more orders in a single API call. For a single order, starshipit_print_label gives more control (carrier override, package dimensions).

Parameters:

order_ids (required): Array of numeric StarShipIt order IDs to print labels for. Must contain at least one ID.
reprint (optional): Set to true to reprint previously generated labels for the specified orders. Defaults to false.

Returns: An array of label results — one entry per order — each containing the label URL or base64-encoded label data, the assigned tracking number, carrier, and service. Individual orders that fail will include an error field while others may succeed.

Example success response:

{
  "success": true,
  "labels": [
    {
      "order_id": 101,
      "tracking_number": "TRACK001",
      "label_url": "https://cdn.starshipit.com/labels/label-101.pdf",
      "carrier": "AUSPOST"
    },
    {
      "order_id": 102,
      "tracking_number": "TRACK002",
      "label_url": "https://cdn.starshipit.com/labels/label-102.pdf",
      "carrier": "AUSPOST"
    }
  ]
}

Error cases: 400 if any order IDs are invalid or missing required order data; 404 if one or more orders do not exist; 409 if labels already exist and reprint is not true.

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`reprint`	No	Set to true to reprint previously generated labels (default: false)
`order_ids`	Yes	Array of StarShipIt order IDs to print labels for

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description
`errors`	No	Validation or processing errors returned by StarShipIt
`object`	No	The response payload when StarShipIt returns a non-object value
`success`	No	StarShipIt success flag (a boolean on most endpoints)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Nov 3, 2026

TDQS

A4.6/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the annotations, the description discloses per-order failure isolation, the shape of returned label results, and concrete error cases including 409 when labels already exist without `reprint=true`. This adds meaningful behavioral context for a non-read-only, non-idempotent operation without contradicting the supplied hints.

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 well organized with front-loaded when-to-use guidance, parameter notes, returns, and error cases. The example response is somewhat verbose relative to the schema and output schema, but the structure makes the important selection criteria easy to find.

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

Completeness5/5

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

Given the complexity of a bulk mutation tool, the description covers usage routing, parameter behavior, partial success semantics, return values, and error cases. Although an output schema exists, the extra return and error detail makes the tool sufficiently complete for an agent to call it correctly.

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 already 100%, and the description mostly restates the parameter meanings. It does add some useful context around `reprint` via the 409 error case, but it does not substantially deepen parameter semantics beyond what the schema already documents.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description states a specific verb and resource ('Print shipping labels') plus a clear bulk scope ('multiple orders at once'). It explicitly distinguishes itself from the sibling `starshipit_print_label`, so an agent can choose between single and bulk label printing without opening either schema.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

It gives explicit when-to-use guidance: two or more orders in a single call. It also names the alternative for a single order and explains why that alternative is preferable (carrier override, package dimensions), leaving little to inference.

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

Deploy Server