Mercury Multiorg MCP

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

list_webhooks

Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieve webhook configuration for an entity, including endpoint status, event types, and filter paths. Use to verify which webhooks are subscribed to specific events.

Instructions

Read-only view of webhook endpoints: id, url fingerprint, status/enabled, event types, filter paths.

    Never the signing secret and never the receiver URL: the URL is a
    capability in every part, including the hostname (e.g.
    `<secret>.m.pipedream.net`). `url_fingerprint` (first 8 hex chars of
    sha256 of the full URL) keeps two hooks distinguishable. Use this for
    the webhook configuration (which event types and filter paths each
    endpoint subscribes to); use `list_events` for the events themselves.
    Every page is walked.

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": {
      "entity": "<entity>"
    },
    "name": "list_webhooks"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`entity`	Yes	Exact `entity` key from `list_entities`, not its `display_name`. Required; there is no default.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedv0.1.6Sep 15, 2026

changedInput schema / properties / entity / description

Previous value: -"Entity key from `list_entities`. Required; there is no default."New value: +"Exact `entity` key from `list_entities`, not its `display_name`. Required; there is no default."

First observedv0.1.4Sep 14, 2026

TDQS

A4.7/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already declare read-only, idempotent, open-world, and non-destructive behavior. The description adds critical non-obvious context: it never returns the signing secret or receiver URL because the URL is a capability, explains the url_fingerprint derivation, and states that 'Every page is walked' (pagination behavior). This goes well beyond the annotations with no contradiction.

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 core purpose and returned fields are front-loaded in the first sentence. Each subsequent sentence adds distinct value: security constraints, fingerprint semantics, tool routing, and pagination. There is no filler.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a one-parameter list tool with a rich output schema and strong annotations, the description covers purpose, security-sensitive omissions, alternative-tool routing, and pagination. Nothing an agent needs to invoke it correctly is missing.

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?

The input schema fully documents the single entity parameter with 100% coverage, so the schema carries the burden. The description does not add parameter-specific detail, so the baseline 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?

States a specific action ('Read-only view of webhook endpoints') and enumerates the returned fields: id, url fingerprint, status/enabled, event types, filter paths. It also explicitly differentiates itself from list_events, so an agent can tell them apart.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

Provides explicit routing guidance: 'Use this for the webhook configuration ... use list_events for the events themselves.' This makes the choice between siblings unambiguous. The schema also adds the requirement to pass the exact entity key from list_entities.

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