Retrieve all webhook subscriptions for a user without exposing secrets. Use it to review active endpoints and verify configurations before updating or debugging integrations.
List the caller's webhook subscriptions (secrets are never returned)
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| user_id | No |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| subscriptions | No |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.1Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses that secrets are never returned, which is good for a read operation. However, it does not mention authentication, pagination, or other behavioral aspects beyond that.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is a single sentence of 11 words, which is highly concise. It front-loads the key action and immediately adds a critical behavioral note about secrets.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
For a simple list tool with an output schema, the description is mostly adequate but lacks explanation of the user_id parameter and potential pagination or filtering. The behavioral note helps, but the parameter gap reduces completeness.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema description coverage is 0%. The sole parameter 'user_id' is not explained in the description. It is unclear what effect this parameter has or whether it allows listing others' subscriptions, which contradicts 'the caller's'.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description uses a specific verb ('List') and resource ('webhook subscriptions') and clarifies scope ('the caller's'). It distinguishes from sibling tools like webhook_subscribe and webhook_unsubscribe by being a read operation.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The description implies usage for viewing existing subscriptions but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives like webhook_subscribe or webhook_settings. No 'when not to use' or alternative mentions.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.