lulu-print-mcp

List webhooks

list_webhooks

Read-only

Retrieve all webhook subscriptions configured on a Lulu account to audit callback endpoints and confirm which print order events are being tracked.

Instructions

List all webhook subscriptions on this Lulu account.

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 observedv1.0.0Nov 11, 2026

TDQS

A3.6/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds only the account-scoping detail ('this Lulu account'); it does not mention pagination, ordering, or whether an empty list is possible, though these are modest concerns for a simple read.

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?

A single sentence that front-loads the verb and resource with zero filler. Nothing could be removed without losing meaning.

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 zero-parameter read tool this is close to adequate, but with no output schema present the description gives no hint about the shape of the returned webhook subscription records or whether results are paginated. Those are the only remaining gaps.

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 tool takes zero parameters, so there is nothing for the description to disambiguate beyond confirming the operation is unfiltered. Baseline 4 applies when no parameter semantics exist to explain.

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?

The description states a specific verb (list) and resource (webhook subscriptions) scoped to the account, which lets an agent tell it apart from get_webhook and list_webhook_submissions. It stops short of naming those siblings explicitly, so differentiation relies on inference from the word 'all'.

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?

'List all' implies this is the enumeration entry point, and the lack of any parameters signals an unfiltered sweep. However, there is no explicit guidance on when to use this versus get_webhook for a single record or when to fall back to list_webhook_submissions.

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