Dialpad MCP server

dialpad_list_webhooks

Read-onlyIdempotent

List registered Dialpad webhook endpoints (ID and URL) to audit where call and event notifications are delivered. Signing secrets are never returned.

Instructions

List webhook endpoints registered with Dialpad (ID and URL). The signing secret is never returned. Endpoint URLs are internal - admin-gated.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "dialpad_list_webhooks"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`cursor`	No	Cursor from next_cursor of the previous page, to get the next page.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Nov 14, 2026

TDQS

A3.9/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already establish that this is a read-only, idempotent, non-destructive open-world operation. The description adds meaningful behavior beyond that: returned fields are ID and URL, the signing secret is never returned, and endpoint URLs are admin-gated. It does not discuss pagination behavior or rate limits, so it falls 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.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Three short sentences with no filler, and the core purpose is front-loaded. Each sentence adds useful information: returned fields, the secret exclusion, and the admin access constraint.

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

Completeness5/5

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

For a simple read-only list tool with one optional cursor parameter and no output schema, the description is complete enough. It explains the returned fields, the sensitive value that is omitted, and the admin access gate, while the schema covers cursor pagination.

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?

There is one optional cursor parameter, and schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema already explains pagination. The description adds no additional meaning about the cursor or pagination beyond what the schema provides, making the baseline 3 appropriate.

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 states a specific verb and resource: 'List webhook endpoints registered with Dialpad.' The parenthetical '(ID and URL)' further clarifies what is returned, and the webhook resource is clearly distinct from the sibling list/get tools.

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?

It gives no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance and does not route the agent toward an alternative tool. The 'admin-gated' note is an access prerequisite, not guidance on selecting this tool versus other listing tools.

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