Skip to main content
Glama
growsurf

GrowSurf MCP Server

Official
by growsurf
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Hybrid

growsurf_update_campaign_webhook

DestructiveIdempotent

Update a GrowSurf program webhook by ID, modifying only specified fields such as payload URL, events, secret, or enabled status. Target a specific campaign or use the default campaign.

Instructions

Update a webhook on your GrowSurf program by id (webhookId is primary for the program's primary webhook). Only the fields you send are changed. secret is write-only and never returned. Targets campaignId if you pass it, otherwise GROWSURF_CAMPAIGN_ID.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
eventsNo
secretNoWrite-only.
isEnabledNo
webhookIdYes
campaignIdNoTarget program (campaign) id for this call. Defaults to GROWSURF_CAMPAIGN_ID when omitted. Pass the `id` returned by growsurf_create_campaign to configure or operate a program you just created, without restarting the server.
payloadUrlNo

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv0.14.0
    • addedInput schema / anyOf
      Added value: +[
+  {
+    "required": [
+      "payloadUrl"
+    ]
+  },
+  {
+    "required": [
+      "events"
+    ]
+  },
+  {
+    "required": [
+      "secret"
+    ]
+  },
+  {
+    "required": [
+      "isEnabled"
+    ]
+  }
+]
  2. First observedv0.12.2

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already indicate write, idempotent, and destructive hints. The description adds valuable behavioral context: partial updates, write-only secret never returned, and the campaignId fallback logic. These go beyond the annotations and help the agent understand side effects and security semantics. No contradiction with annotations.

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 three sentences, front-loaded with the core action, and each sentence adds unique value (identification, partial update, write-only secret, targeting). No redundancy or filler.

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?

The description covers the key nuances: primary webhook, partial update semantics, write-only secret, and campaign targeting. With an output schema present, return values are handled. Minor gaps remain around the specific meaning of payloadUrl and events values, but these are fairly self-explanatory from the schema enums and naming. Overall, it's sufficiently complete for an update tool.

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 only 33% (secret and campaignId have descriptions). The description adds meaning for webhookId ('primary' for the primary webhook) and campaignId (targeting behavior). However, payloadUrl, events, and isEnabled are not elaborated beyond their names. Given the low coverage, the description should compensate more for these parameters but only partially does.

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 clearly states the action ('Update a webhook'), the resource (GrowSurf program webhook), and the identifier (by id). It also distinguishes the primary webhook with a special id. This is a specific verb+resource that differentiates it from sibling tools like create, delete, list, and test webhooks.

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 implies usage for modifying an existing webhook and explains partial update behavior ('Only the fields you send are changed'), which guides when to use this vs recreating. It also clarifies campaign targeting with campaignId vs the default GROWSURF_CAMPAIGN_ID. However, it doesn't explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives like create_campaign_webhook.

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