Skip to main content
Glama

LexQ

by io.lexq.mcp
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Save Webhook Subscription

lexq_webhook_subscriptions_save
Destructive

Create or update a webhook subscription. Omit id to create, provide id to update. Events: VERSION_PUBLISHED, DEPLOYED, ROLLED_BACK, UNDEPLOYED. Formats: GENERIC (full JSON), SLACK ({"text": "..."}).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idNoSubscription ID (omit to create, provide to update)
nameYesSubscription name (unique per tenant)
secretNoHMAC-SHA256 signing secret
isActiveNoWhether the subscription is active
webhookUrlYesWebhook endpoint URL
payloadFormatNoPayload formatGENERIC
subscribedEventsYesEvents to subscribe to

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed3 schema fields changed
    • changedInput schema / $schema
      Previous value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"New value: +"https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema"
    • removedInput schema / additionalProperties
      Removed value: -false
    • addedInput schema / properties / id / pattern
      Added value: +"^([0-9a-fA-F]{8}-[0-9a-fA-F]{4}-[1-8][0-9a-fA-F]{3}-[89abAB][0-9a-fA-F]{3}-[0-9a-fA-F]{12}|00000000-0000-0000-0000-000000000000|ffffffff-ffff-ffff-ffff-ffffffffffff)$"
  2. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / subscribedEvents / items / enum
      Previous value: -[
-  "VERSION_PUBLISHED",
-  "DEPLOYED",
-  "ROLLED_BACK",
-  "UNDEPLOYED"
-]New value: +[
+  "VERSION_PUBLISHED",
+  "DEPLOYED",
+  "ROLLED_BACK",
+  "UNDEPLOYED",
+  "DEPLOY_SCHEDULED",
+  "DEPLOY_SCHEDULE_CANCELED"
+]
  3. Added

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already convey write/destructive behavior, and the description adds useful operational context: id controls create vs update, supported event names, and the meaning of GENERIC vs SLACK payloads. It does not detail update merge/replacement behavior or side effects, but it is not contradicted by 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?

Two sentences pack the operation, create/update discriminator, event list, and format semantics with no filler. Front-loading 'Create or update' lets an agent immediately know if this tool is relevant.

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?

The core create/update semantics and most parameter behavior are documented across the description and 100%-covered schema. However, with no output schema, the description does not say what the tool returns, and it omits two valid subscribedEvents enum values, leaving an agent to infer response shape and the full event set from elsewhere.

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 100%, so the baseline is 3, but the description adds value by clarifying payload formats: GENERIC means full JSON and SLACK uses a text-wrapped shape. The event list is slightly incomplete versus the schema enum (missing DEPLOY_SCHEDULED and DEPLOY_SCHEDULE_CANCELED), limiting the bonus.

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?

The description opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Create or update a webhook subscription,' which is not a tautology and clearly separates this tool from the delete/get/list/test sibling tools. The id-based create-vs-update rule adds precise scope.

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?

It states exactly when to create (omit id) and when to update (provide id), which is the primary selection condition. It does not explicitly name alternatives or when-not-to-use cases, but the read/delete/test operations are clearly distinct from an upsert.

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

All LexQ 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