Skip to main content
Glama
beel-es

BeeL MCP server

Official
by beel-es
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Hybrid

beel_retry_webhook_delivery

Idempotent

Retry a failed webhook delivery by re-sending the exact original payload immediately, preserving the captured data and recording the retry in delivery history.

Instructions

Re-sends the original payload of a delivery immediately.

  • Payload: the one captured when the event happened, not a fresh snapshot, so changes made to the entity since then are not reflected.

  • History: the outcome is recorded as a new entry and the original entry is kept as it was. attempt_number continues the same sequence, so it can exceed the 5 automatic attempts.

Endpoint: POST /v1/accounts/{account_id}/webhooks/{webhook_id}/deliveries/{delivery_id}/retry

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
account_idYesYour own account, or an account you provisioned. It — not the credential, and not the `BeeL-Active-Company` header — decides which account the operation acts on. An account you do not reach answers `403`, and so does an account that does not exist, so the existence of somebody else's account is never disclosed.
webhook_idYesSubscription of the account in the path. A subscription of another account answers `404`, the same as one that does not exist: under the account resolved from `{account_id}` it simply is not there.
delivery_idYesDelivery attempt of that subscription to replay.
idempotency_keyNoOptional idempotency key for this operation. Omit it and one is derived from the request itself, which makes a blind retry safe but also collapses a SECOND, deliberately identical operation into the first for 24 hours. Set it — to an order id, or anything unique per intended operation — whenever you mean to create something that may look identical to what you just created.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv0.5.0
    • addedInput schema / additionalProperties
      Added value: +false
  2. First observedv0.3.1

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

The description richly discloses behavioral details beyond the annotations: it re-sends the original captured payload rather than a fresh snapshot, records a new history entry while preserving the original, and continues the same attempt_number sequence which can exceed the 5 automatic attempts. This is valuable and non-obvious information that annotations do not convey.

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 well-structured and efficient: a one-line core statement followed by two focused bullet points on payload and history semantics, plus the endpoint. Every sentence adds meaningful context without redundancy.

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?

For a tool with no output schema, the description covers the most important behavioral aspects an agent needs to know: what is re-sent, how history is recorded, and how attempt_number behaves. It does not describe response values or explicit error conditions, but those are arguably outside the description's minimal burden here given the rich parameter schema.

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 description coverage is 100%, with detailed descriptions for account_id, webhook_id, delivery_id, and idempotency_key. The description does not add parameter-level information, but because the schema already carries this burden, the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 and resource: 'Re-sends the original payload of a delivery immediately.' It clearly identifies the tool as a webhook delivery retry operation and even gives the endpoint. However, it does not explicitly distinguish itself from similar retry-related siblings such as beel_retry_payment_event.

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 intended use is implied by the description and name: retry a webhook delivery. It gives useful context about payload and history, but does not explicitly state when to prefer this tool over alternatives like beel_retry_payment_event or beel_test_webhook_subscription, nor does it provide exclusions.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools