Tulina

granola_webhook_endpoint

A webhook endpoint receiving Granola event deliveries — list, create, update, or delete one. Unlike most write-capable tools here, the full CRUD lifecycle is exposed: managing a webhook subscription isn't destructive of user data (notes/transcripts), just integration plumbing.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "granola_webhook_endpoint"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`op`	No	"list" (default) \| "create" \| "update" \| "delete".	list
`url`	No	REQUIRED by "create" — publicly reachable HTTPS URL to deliver events to. Optional on "update" (change it).
`_org`	No	Org (id) de CET APPEL. `oto_list_orgs()`.
`_group`	No	Équipe (id) de CET APPEL, sous son org parente.
`events`	No	which event types to subscribe to (omit on "create" = all three). Optional on "update".
`scopes`	No	REQUIRED by "create" — which notes to receive events for: `["personal"]` (notes you own/shared with you), `["public"]` (workspace-visible notes), or both. A Workspace API key must pass exactly `["workspace"]` (confirmed live). Optional on "update".
`_run_id`	No	OBLIGATOIRE à chaque appel dès `run_start` ou `data_claim_next` : sans lui, l'écriture sur une ligne réservée est refusée. Hérité seulement si le serveur tient un run actif — n'y compte pas.
`enabled`	No	"update" only — pause/resume delivery without deleting the endpoint.
`_account`	No	Compte à OPÉRER parmi : `Alessandro` (org), `principal` (org, défaut). `oto_identity(op='list')`.
`_project`	No	Projet (id) de CET APPEL — jeton PRIMAIRE. `oto_project(op='list')`.
`_instance`	No	Instance de connecteur PRÉCISE (un credential exact). `oto_instance(op='list')`.
`folder_ids`	No	restrict delivery to these folders + their subfolders (from `granola_content(op="list_folders")`, max 100). Omit = every note matching `scopes`. Optional on "update".
`webhook_endpoint_id`	No	REQUIRED by "update"/"delete" (`whe_...`). Refused on "list"/"create".

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

No schema history has been recorded yet.

TDQS

A3.5/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden and does add value by stating the operations are non-destructive to user data (notes/transcripts). However, it omits key behavioral facts: whether delete is irreversible, auth/permission requirements, and delivery semantics, leaving meaningful gaps for a mutation-capable tool.

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 sentences, front-loaded with the resource and operations, with the safety framing following. Minor editorializing ('just integration plumbing') is slightly informal but does not obscure the point.

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?

An output schema exists and the input schema is fully documented, so the description needn't explain returns or params. It supplies the purpose and a safety framing, which is largely sufficient, though a note on delete irreversibility would round it out.

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 every parameter including op, url, scopes, events, and webhook_endpoint_id. The description adds no parameter-level meaning beyond what the schema provides, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 resource (webhook endpoint for Granola event deliveries) and enumerates the four operations (list/create/update/delete), so the agent knows exactly what the tool does. It does not name a sibling alternative, but the CRUD framing makes its scope distinct.

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?

The description implies usage (managing a webhook subscription) and clarifies it is integration plumbing rather than note manipulation, but it gives no explicit when-to-use vs when-not guidance or pointers to related tools like granola_content for folder/event discovery.

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

All Tulina tools Inspect

Try in Browser

One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources

Need Help?