NomaCMS MCP Server

Official

by NomaCMS

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

TypeScript

Remote

List Webhooks

list_webhooks

List all webhooks configured for the current NomaCMS project to view and manage integration endpoints.

Instructions

List all webhooks configured for the current project

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": "list_webhooks"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.2.1Jul 11, 2026

TDQS

A3.7/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are present, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only states 'list', but does not explain expected behavior such as pagination, ordering, or return format. This is lacking for a read operation.

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?

The description is a single, concise sentence that is front-loaded and contains no extraneous information. Every word is necessary.

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?

For a simple list tool with no parameters, the description covers the basic scope. However, it lacks details about the output (e.g., what fields are returned) and does not mention any limits or ordering, leaving some ambiguity.

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?

The input schema has no parameters, so the description is not required to document them. However, it adds value by clarifying the scope ('current project'), earning a score above baseline 3.

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 clearly states the action ('List') and the resource ('webhooks'), specifying the scope ('configured for the current project'). This distinguishes it from siblings like 'get_webhook' (single) and 'list_webhook_logs' (different resource).

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?

The description implies usage for viewing all webhooks but provides no explicit guidance on when to use versus alternatives (e.g., 'get_webhook' for details). No context or exclusions are given.

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