Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
BeeL MCP server

BeeL MCP server

Official
by beel-es
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Hybrid

beel_rotate_webhook_secret

DestructiveIdempotent

Rotate a webhook subscription's HMAC signing secret, immediately invalidating the old secret and returning the new one once so you can update signature verification.

Instructions

Generates a new HMAC signing secret for a webhook subscription.

  • Old secret: immediately invalidated. Update your signature verification logic before rotating, to avoid missing events during the transition.

  • New secret: returned once, in this response only. It cannot be read again.

BeeL API endpoint: POST /v1/accounts/{account_id}/webhooks/{webhook_id}/secret (reference: https://docs.beel.es)

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "account_id": "<account_id>",
      "webhook_id": "<webhook_id>"
    },
    "name": "beel_rotate_webhook_secret"
  }
}

Input 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.
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

A4.3/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Although the annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=true, the description adds crucial behavior that the annotations cannot convey: the old secret is immediately invalidated, and the new secret is returned once and can never be read again. That is exactly what an agent needs before committing to an irreversible mutation.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The purpose sentence comes first and is followed by two short bullets that each carry real operational value. The trailing API endpoint and documentation line is mildly extraneous for an agent already handed a schema, but it is compact and harmless.

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 3-parameter mutation with no output schema, the description covers the essential return fact, namely that the secret comes back once, plus the irreversible side effect. Minor gaps remain, such as whether existing deliveries fail immediately or when the new secret takes effect, but nothing blocks correct invocation.

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%, and the parameter descriptions, including the idempotency-key caveat about collapsing identical operations for 24 hours, are exceptionally detailed. The description adds no parameter meaning beyond the schema, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 states a specific verb and resource: 'Generates a new HMAC signing secret for a webhook subscription.' That is clearly distinct from sibling tools such as beel_patch_webhook_subscription (editing settings) and beel_create_webhook_subscription (creating subscriptions), so an agent can select it without opening the schemas.

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?

The description gives clear operating context and a critical sequencing rule: update your signature verification logic before rotating, or you will miss events. It does not explicitly name alternatives, such as when to patch settings instead of rotate, nor state preconditions like required scopes, so it falls short of a full when and when-not explanation.

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