Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Greenhouse MCP

Greenhouse MCP

by benmonopoli
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Remote

webhook_list_rules

List all configured webhook routing rules, including event types, actions, and status. Read-only view for auditing or verifying Greenhouse ATS webhook setup.

Instructions

List all webhook routing rules. Read-only.

Returns all configured rules with their event types, actions, and status.

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": "webhook_list_rules"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Addedv0.3.4

TDQS

A3.5/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full disclosure burden. It does state 'Read-only' and indicates the returned content (event types, actions, status), which is useful, but it says nothing about permissions, scoping, or ordering/limits on the returned rules.

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 short sentences with the read-only qualifier placed immediately after the action statement. No filler, no repetition of the tool name, and the key trait is front-loaded.

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 zero-parameter, read-only listing tool with an output schema that documents the return shape, the description covers what an agent needs. The only shortfall is the absent guidance on how this differs from the other webhook listing tools.

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 is an empty object with zero parameters, so there is nothing for the description to disambiguate. Baseline of 4 applies for a parameterless tool.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('List all webhook routing rules'), which is enough to separate it from the create/update/delete rule siblings. However, it never explicitly contrasts itself with webhook_list_events or webhook_list_recent, so the agent must infer the distinction from the noun 'rules' alone.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

There is no when-to-use guidance, no exclusions, and no named alternative among the four sibling webhook read/query tools (list_events, list_recent, test_rule, setup_guide). The description simply declares what the tool is, leaving routing entirely to the agent.

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