CatchAll (by NewsCatcher)

list_resource_webhooks

List the webhooks mapped to a specific resource (job/monitor/monitor_group).

Use when:

You have a job or monitor ID and want to know which webhooks will fire for it.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`page`	No	Page number for pagination (default: 1).
`api_key`	No	CatchAll API key. Optional if provided via x-api-key header or CATCHALL_API_KEY env var.
`is_active`	No	Optional filter — only active (true) or inactive (false) webhooks.
`page_size`	No	Number of results per page (default: 100, max: 1000).
`resource_id`	Yes	The ID of the job/monitor/monitor_group.
`resource_type`	Yes	Resource type: 'job', 'monitor', or 'monitor_group'.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

TDQS

A3.7/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

No annotations provided, so description bears full responsibility. It does not disclose pagination, filtering, authentication requirements, or error behavior, leaving gaps for an agent.

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?

Two short sentences, no fluff, front-loaded with the primary action.

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

Completeness3/5

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

Adequate for a list tool with an output schema, but missing details on pagination and filtering that are defined in the schema but not summarized in description.

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 covers 100% of parameters with descriptions, so baseline is 3. Description adds no additional parameter meaning beyond schema.

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?

Description clearly states it lists webhooks for a specific resource (job/monitor/monitor_group), distinguishing it from sibling tools like list_webhooks (all webhooks) and list_webhook_resources (resources for a webhook).

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?

Explicit 'Use when' guidance is given, providing a clear scenario. Could mention when not to use or alternatives, but the context is sufficient.

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

All CatchAll (by NewsCatcher) tools Inspect

Try in Browser

RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A3.6/5.0

Disambiguation5/5

Each tool is scoped to a specific resource type and action, with clear distinctions between similarly named operations (e.g., pull_results vs pull_job_csv, initialize_query vs validate_query). No two tools appear to perform the same function.

Naming Consistency4/5

Tools consistently use snake_case verb_noun patterns (create_X, get_X, list_X, update_X, delete_X), with domain-specific verbs like submit, pull, initialize, and validate adding semantic clarity. Minor deviations such as pull_* vs get_* and compound names like create_dataset_from_csv are still predictable.

Tool Count2/5

At 60 tools, the server is heavily overstuffed for a single MCP surface. While the broad domain (datasets, entities, jobs, monitors, projects, webhooks) justifies many operations, the sheer volume exceeds typical recommended limits and includes near-duplicates (pull_results vs pull_job_csv, get_dataset vs get_dataset_status), making agent tool selection unwieldy.

Completeness4/5

The tool set provides robust CRUD and lifecycle coverage for all major resources, including special operations like csv import, webhook mapping, and monitor enable/disable. Minor gaps such as the absence of a get_monitor (single monitor details) and no cancel_job can be worked around via list_monitors and waiting for job completion.

Resources

Need Help?