AstroWay Platform

Register VOC-Start Webhook

astroway_webhooks_void_of_course_start

Fires at the start of every VOC Moon period.

[Group: Webhooks] [Endpoint: POST /v1/webhooks/void-of-course-start] [Required: url] [Cost: 10 credits (Tier 1)]

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": {
      "url": "<url>"
    },
    "name": "astroway_webhooks_void_of_course_start"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`url`	Yes
`fields`	No	Compact mode: comma-separated dotted paths to keep, relative to `data`, e.g. "planets.name,planets.longitude,houses.cusp". Omit for the whole response.
`precision`	No	Compact mode: round fractional numbers to this many decimals. Longitudes carry 14 by default; 2 is finer than any chart is drawn.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`id`	No
`event`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed4 schema fields changedNov 7, 2026

removedOutput schema / properties / event / anyOf

Removed value: -[
-  {
-    "type": "string"
-  },
-  {
-    "type": "null"
-  }
-]

addedOutput schema / properties / event / type
```
Added value: +[
+  "string",
+  "null"
+]
```

removedOutput schema / properties / id / anyOf

Removed value: -[
-  {
-    "type": "number"
-  },
-  {
-    "type": "null"
-  }
-]

addedOutput schema / properties / id / type

Added value: +[
+  "number",
+  "null"
+]

First observedOct 5, 2026

TDQS

B3.2/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already disclose readOnlyHint false, openWorldHint true, idempotentHint false, and destructiveHint false. The description adds useful cost (10 credits) and endpoint details but omits behavioral implications such as whether repeated calls create duplicate webhooks or how authentication works.

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?

The description is front-loaded with the event, followed by compact metadata lines for group, endpoint, required parameter, and cost. It is efficient with no redundant wording beyond the minor ambiguity in the opening sentence.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity, the description covers the essential registration details (endpoint, required url, cost) and an output schema exists for return values. However, it lacks usage context and does not clarify idempotency implications critical for a non-idempotent webhook registration.

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 67%, with fields and precision fully described in the schema. The description restates '[Required: url]' but adds no extra meaning for url beyond its URI format, leaving the schema to carry parameter semantics.

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?

The description names the specific event (VOC Moon start) and the endpoint, making it clear it registers a webhook for that event. However, the first sentence 'Fires at the start...' describes the webhook's behavior rather than the tool's action, which could momentarily confuse an agent about whether the tool itself fires or registers.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

No guidance is given on when to use this tool versus alternatives like astroway_stream_void_of_course or astroway_webhooks_subscribe. The description states what event it targets but offers no conditions for selection.

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

All AstroWay Platform tools Inspect

Try in Browser

Claude Code, inside the Godot 4 editorFlockbay puts an AI agent in the real Godot 4 editor: it writes GDScript, runs your game and fixes what breaks. Free, or bring your own Claude Code or Codex.flockbay.comAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources

Need Help?