Skip to main content
Glama

Pokemon TCG Restock Alerts - bujusjujus

test_webhook

Send one signed test POST to the webhook registered for this API key and report at once whether it was accepted: { delivered, status, error, hint, tookMs, sentAt, url, active }. The body is { type:"test", sentAt, note } with the usual X-Bujus-Signature header and NO alert field, so a receiver should verify the signature, answer 2xx, and ignore any type other than "alert". Use it right after set_webhook instead of waiting for a real drop. Not billed and not retried, and it does not change the webhook's failure count. At most 10 per hour.

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": "test_webhook"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Added

TDQS

A4.6/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full load and does it well: it discloses the exact payload and signature header, that there is no alert field, that it is unbilled and unretried, that it does not affect the failure count, and the rate limit of 10/hour. The receiver-side contract (verify signature, answer 2xx) is also spelled out.

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?

Front-loaded with the action and result, and every clause adds real information. The opening sentence is long and dense, carrying payload and return fields in one breath, which slightly hurts scanability.

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?

No output schema and no annotations, yet the description enumerates every returned field and covers safety, billing, and rate behavior. An agent has everything needed to invoke it and interpret the response.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description still adds meaning by describing the generated request body and header, which is beyond anything the empty schema conveys.

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 (send one signed test POST to the registered webhook) plus the immediate outcome reported. It is unmistakable against siblings like set_webhook, get_webhook, and wait_for_drop.

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?

Gives clear trigger context: 'Use it right after set_webhook instead of waiting for a real drop,' which names a sibling and an alternative approach. It stops short of explicit when-not-to-use guidance beyond the implicit 10-per-hour rate cap.

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.

Resources