Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

Urlbox

by io.github.urlbox
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

List webhook endpoints

list_webhooks
Read-only

List a project's webhook endpoints: URL, the events they receive (render.succeeded, render.failed), whether they are enabled, and their signing secrets' ids and labels (never the secret values).

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": {
      "intent": "<intent>"
    },
    "name": "list_webhooks"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
intentYesRequired. In one or two sentences, what you are trying to achieve for the user with this call and why (for example: 'Screenshot the pricing page so the user can compare plans'). Recorded for analytics and audit; do not include secrets.
projectNoProject id (proj_…) or exact name. Defaults to your default project.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuinely new behavioral context by noting that signing secret values are never returned, only ids and labels — a privacy property not expressible in the annotations.

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?

A single well-formed sentence with the resource and scope front-loaded and the returned fields following immediately. Every clause carries information; there is no filler or repetition of the title.

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?

There is no output schema, so the description has to carry the return shape and it does so well, naming the four field groups. It omits pagination, ordering, and whether disabled endpoints are included, but those are secondary for a simple read-only list.

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 description coverage is 100%, so both the required 'intent' and the optional 'project' parameter are already documented in the schema. The phrase 'a project's webhook endpoints' hints at project scoping but adds no syntax, defaulting, or filtering detail beyond what the schema provides.

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 ('List a project's webhook endpoints') and immediately enumerates what is returned: URL, subscribed events (render.succeeded, render.failed), enabled status, and signing secret ids/labels. No sibling tool covers webhooks, so there is no ambiguity to resolve.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

Usage is only implied: an agent can infer this is the tool for inspecting webhook configuration, but there is no explicit statement of when to call it (e.g., before updating or after creating a webhook) and no mention of a related alternative. Given no competing sibling exists, the cost of the omission is modest.

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

All Urlbox 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