Skip to main content
Glama

Watch domain

watch_domain

Subscribe to a domain: a signed JSON POST goes to your webhook when its llms.txt changes, breaks, is restored, loses its llms-full.txt, changes tier, or its verification changes. Returns a watch id and a secret (shown once) for the signature and for unsubscribing. 20 new watches per hour per client, 5 active per domain per client.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
domainYesA domain name such as example.com (no scheme, no path).
webhook_urlYesPublic http(s) URL that accepts a JSON POST.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed6 schema fields changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / domain / maxLength
      Added value: +253
    • addedInput schema / properties / domain / minLength
      Added value: +1
    • addedInput schema / properties / webhook_url / maxLength
      Added value: +500
    • addedInput schema / properties / webhook_url / minLength
      Added value: +1
    • addedInput schema / properties / webhook_url / pattern
      Added value: +"^https?://"
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
      +  "anyOf": [
      +    {
      +      "additionalProperties": false,
      +      "properties": {
      +        "delivery": {
      +          "type": "string"
      +        },
      +        "domain": {
      +          "type": "string"
      +        },
      +        "events": {
      +          "items": {
      +            "type": "string"
      +          },
      +          "type": "array"
      +        },
      +        "note": {
      +          "type": "string"
      +        },
      +        "secret": {
      +          "type": "string"
      +        },
      +        "test": {
      +          "type": "string"
      +        },
      +        "unsubscribe": {
      +          "type": "string"
      +        },
      +        "watch_id": {
      +          "type": "integer"
      +        },
      +        "webhook_url": {
      +          "type": "string"
      +        }
      +      },
      +      "required": [
      +        "watch_id",
      +        "domain",
      +        "webhook_url",
      +        "secret",
      +        "events",
      +        "delivery",
      +        "test",
      +        "unsubscribe",
      +        "note"
      +      ],
      +      "type": "object"
      +    },
      +    {
      +      "additionalProperties": true,
      +      "properties": {
      +        "detail": {
      +          "type": "string"
      +        },
      +        "domain": {
      +          "type": "string"
      +        },
      +        "error": {
      +          "type": "string"
      +        },
      +        "hint": {
      +          "type": "string"
      +        },
      +        "retry_after_seconds": {
      +          "type": "integer"
      +        }
      +      },
      +      "required": [
      +        "error"
      +      ],
      +      "type": "object"
      +    }
      +  ],
      +  "type": "object"
      +}
  2. Added

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already declare it as a non-read-only, open-world, non-idempotent, non-destructive mutation. The description adds substantial behavior beyond that: the POST is signed JSON, the returned secret is shown only once and is needed for signature verification and unsubscribing, and there are per-client rate and active-watch caps.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Three sentences, front-loaded with the core action and its trigger events, then the return/secret behavior, then limits. No filler, and each clause carries information an agent needs.

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?

Although an output schema exists, the description still usefully flags the one-time secret and its purpose, plus rate limits that affect whether a call will succeed. For a subscription tool with two fully documented params, nothing material is missing.

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 both parameters (domain format, public http(s) webhook_url) are already fully documented in the schema. The description adds no additional syntax or format detail for the parameters themselves, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Subscribe to a domain') and enumerates the exact events that fire the webhook (llms.txt changes, breaks, is restored, loses llms-full.txt, tier change, verification change). This clearly distinguishes it from siblings like unwatch_domain and test_watch.

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 description gives strong context for when this applies (you want a webhook notified on llms.txt state changes) and discloses capacity limits ('20 new watches per hour per client, 5 active per domain per client'). It does not explicitly name alternatives such as test_watch for validating a webhook before subscribing, so it stops short of full when/when-not routing.

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

Try in Browser

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.