Skip to main content
Glama
kisasa

Shopify MCP Server

by kisasa

get-orders

Retrieve Shopify orders with optional status filters, pagination, and field selection; return only needed fields or a count to reduce context usage.

Instructions

Get orders with optional filtering by status. Supports field selection via 'fields' and 'countOnly' to get just the count.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
afterNoCursor for forward pagination
limitNoNumber of orders to return (default 10, max 250)
queryNoRaw query string for advanced filtering (e.g. 'financial_status:paid fulfillment_status:shipped')
beforeNoCursor for backward pagination
fieldsNoIMPORTANT: Always specify this to minimize token usage and avoid flooding context with unnecessary data. Only the listed fields will be fetched from the API and returned. 'id' is always included. If you are unsure which fields are needed, ask the user before fetching all fields. Example: ["id", "name"] returns only order GID and name. Available: id, name, createdAt, financialStatus, fulfillmentStatus, totalPrice, subtotalPrice, shippingPrice, tax, customer, shippingAddress, lineItems, tags, note
statusNoany
reverseNoReverse the sort order
sortKeyNoSort key for orders
countOnlyNoIMPORTANT: Use this to check result set size before fetching data. Returns only { count: N } without any resource data, saving significant context. Recommended before paginating large result sets.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.1.0

TDQS

B3.3/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

No annotations exist, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It does disclose two real behavioral traits — field selection narrows the fetched payload, and countOnly returns just a count — but says nothing about read-only safety, pagination cursor semantics, defaults, or result shape.

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?

Two short sentences, front-loaded with the verb and resource, with no filler. Minor redundancy with the schema's own fields/countOnly descriptions, but nothing wasteful.

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

Completeness2/5

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

For a 9-parameter, zero-annotation, no-output-schema tool, the description is thin: it never mentions the raw 'query' escape hatch, cursor pagination, the default/max limit, or any distinguishing context against ~50 siblings. The rich schema compensates partially, but the description itself is far from complete.

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 89%, so the schema already explains after/before/limit/query/fields/countOnly in detail. The description only echoes status, fields, and countOnly, adding no syntax or interaction rules (e.g., how status interacts with the raw query string). Baseline 3 applies where the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 ("Get orders") plus the optional status filter and the two payload-shaping options. It does not distinguish itself from close siblings like get-order-by-id, get-customer-orders, or get-fulfillment-orders, so the agent must infer the boundary.

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?

Usage is implied by the verb and the mention of status filtering, and the description hints at a size-check workflow via countOnly. There is no explicit when-to-use vs. when-not-to-use, and no routing to the many sibling read tools.

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