Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

MailGlass

by email.dygc.mail
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

manage_webhooks

List, create or delete webhook endpoints for the token project (endpoint count per plan). list returns at most the first 100 endpoints. create: https url (localhost/127.0.0.1/::1 allowed for testing; loopback/private/reserved hosts and unresolvable domains are rejected — SSRF defense); delete: webhookId. The create response contains the signing secret — shown once.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "action": "<action>"
    },
    "name": "manage_webhooks"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
urlNoHTTPS endpoint URL (required for create).
actionYes
eventsNoDefaults to all supported events.
webhookIdNoRequired for delete.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the disclosure burden and mostly succeeds: it states list is capped at the first 100 endpoints, that create enforces SSRF defenses (rejecting loopback/private/reserved and unresolvable hosts) while permitting localhost for testing, and that the signing secret is returned once. It omits what delete does to in-flight deliveries and any rate-limit behavior, keeping it short of a 5.

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 operation set, then per-action clauses, so an agent reading only the first line already knows the tool's scope. The parenthetical SSRF detail is information-dense but the semicolon-chained phrasing makes it slightly harder to scan than a bulleted form.

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?

For a four-parameter mutation tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description covers action selection, input requirements, list truncation, security constraints, and the sensitive create return value. Remaining gaps (pagination beyond the 100 cap, delete side effects) are minor but real.

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?

Schema coverage is 75%, so the schema already documents url, events, and webhookId. The description still adds meaning the schema lacks: the localhost exception in the URL policy, the explicit url/webhookId-to-action binding, and the once-only signing secret returned on create.

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 three specific verbs (list, create, delete) against a specific resource (webhook endpoints) scoped to the token project. It also notes the plan-based endpoint count, so an agent knows both the operation set and the quota context before opening the schema.

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 'list:', 'create:', 'delete:' clauses effectively map each action to its required input, which is real selection guidance. It does not explicitly name a sibling or state when not to use it, but no sibling tool overlaps with webhook management, so the practical risk of misrouting is low.

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

All MailGlass toolsInspect
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