CatchAll (by NewsCatcher)

Official

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

test_webhook

Verify a webhook URL is reachable and correctly configured by sending a test delivery before attaching it to a monitor or job.

Instructions

Send a test delivery to a webhook endpoint.

Use when:

You want to verify a webhook URL is reachable and correctly configured before attaching it to a monitor or job.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`api_key`	No	CatchAll API key. Optional if provided via x-api-key header or CATCHALL_API_KEY env var.
`payload`	No	Optional custom JSON object to send as the test body. If omitted, the API sends a default sample payload.
`webhook_id`	Yes	The webhook ID to test.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.0.0Jul 28, 2026

TDQS

A3.6/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

No annotations provided, so description bears full burden. It states 'send a test delivery' but omits behavioral details like side effects (e.g., whether a real delivery is attempted), idempotency, restrictions, or error behavior. This leaves the agent uncertain about impact.

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 plus a bulleted 'Use when' section. Action verb first. Every sentence adds value. No wasted words.

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?

Given low complexity (3 params, 1 required, no nested objects) and existence of output schema (not shown but indicated), description explains the tool's primary function and use case. Lacks mention of response structure or error cases, but output schema likely covers that.

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 100%, so baseline is 3. Description adds no extra meaning beyond what schema already provides (e.g., 'optional custom JSON object' repeats schema). No enrichment for parameters.

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?

Description clearly states action and resource ('Send a test delivery to a webhook endpoint'). Use-case section hints at differentiation from trigger_webhook by focusing on verification before attaching, but does not explicitly contrast with sibling tools.

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?

Explicit 'Use when' guidance specifies verifying webhook URL reachability and configuration before attaching to monitor/job. Does not mention when not to use, but the positive guidance is clear.

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

Deploy Server