Skip to main content
Glama
enesjakozh
kevinwatt

MCP Webhook Server

by kevinwatt
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Remote

MCP Webhook 服务器

铁匠徽章

一个与 webhook 集成的 MCP 服务器实现，提供消息发送功能。

特征

  • 通用 Webhook 支持：向任何 Webhook 端点发送消息

  • 自定义用户名：设置消息的自定义显示名称

  • 头像支持：自定义消息头像

  • MCP 集成：与 Dive 和其他兼容 MCP 的 LLM 兼容

Related MCP server: notify_me_mcp

安装

通过 Smithery 安装

要通过Smithery自动为 Claude Desktop 安装 MCP Webhook 服务器：

npx -y @smithery/cli install @kevinwatt/mcp-webhook --client claude

手动安装

npm install @kevinwatt/mcp-webhook

使用Dive Desktop进行配置

  1. 在 Dive Desktop 中点击“+ 添加 MCP 服务器”

  2. 复制并粘贴此配置：

{
  "mcpServers": {
    "webhook": {
      "command": "npx",
      "args": [
        "-y",
        "@kevinwatt/mcp-webhook"
      ],
      "env": {
        "WEBHOOK_URL": "your-webhook-url"
      },
      "alwaysAllow": [
        "send_message"
      ]
    }
  }
}

  1. 点击“保存”安装 MCP 服务器

工具文档

  • 发送消息

    • 发送消息到 webhook 端点

    • 输入：

      • content （字符串，必需）：要发送的消息内容

      • username （字符串，可选）：显示名称

      • avatar_url （字符串，可选）：头像 URL

使用示例

要求你的法学硕士：

"Send a message to webhook: Hello World!"
"Send a message with custom name: content='Testing', username='Bot'"

手动启动

如果需要，请手动启动服务器：

npx @kevinwatt/mcp-webhook

要求

  • Node.js 18+

  • MCP 兼容的 LLM 服务

执照

麻省理工学院

作者

凯文·瓦特

关键词

  • 甲基氯丙烯

  • 网络钩子

  • 聊天

  • 潜水

  • 法学硕士

  • 自动化

Available Tools

2 tools
send_jsonC

Send arbitrary JSON object to webhook endpoint

ParametersJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
bodyYesJSON object to send as the POST body

TDQS

C2.9/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavior but only says 'send', implying a POST request. It omits important details like authentication, rate limits, side effects, or the nature of the webhook endpoint.

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 description is very concise with one sentence, no filler words. It is front-loaded with the core action but may be too minimal for completeness.

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

Completeness2/5

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

The description lacks essential context such as expected output, error handling, or endpoint configuration. Without output schema, the agent has no information on what the tool returns.

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 description adds no meaning beyond the input schema's parameter description, which already states 'JSON object to send as the POST body'. Schema coverage is 100%, so baseline score of 3 applies.

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 clearly states the verb 'Send' and the resource 'arbitrary JSON object to webhook endpoint', making the tool's basic function obvious. However, it does not differentiate from the sibling 'send_message' explicitly.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'send_message'. The description simply states the action without any context for selection.

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

send_messageC

Send message to webhook endpoint

ParametersJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
contentYesMessage content to send
usernameNoDisplay name (optional)
avatar_urlNoAvatar URL (optional)

TDQS

C2.9/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, and the description does not disclose any behavioral traits such as authentication needs, rate limits, or side effects. It only states the basic action.

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 description is a single sentence that conveys the core purpose without unnecessary words. It is appropriately concise.

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

Completeness3/5

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

For a simple tool with three parameters and no output schema, the description is adequate but lacks details on expected webhook format or error handling. It could be more complete.

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?

All parameters are already described in the input schema (100% coverage), so the description adds no additional meaning. Baseline score 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 clearly states the action ('send message') and destination ('webhook endpoint'), providing a specific verb and resource. However, it does not differentiate from the sibling tool 'send_json'.

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?

No guidance is given on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor any prerequisites or conditions. The description lacks usage context.

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

Tool Schema Changelog

Recent tool additions, removals, and schema changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. 2 tool updatesv0.2.2
    • Removedsend_json
    • Removedsend_message
  2. 2 tool updatesv0.1.8
    • First observedsend_json
    • First observedsend_message
Deploy Server
One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

TDQS

C2.9/5.0

Scored across 2 tools

Disambiguation3/5

Both tools send data to a webhook endpoint, but 'send_json' is specific to JSON objects while 'send_message' is for general messages. Some overlap exists as JSON could be sent via 'send_message', but descriptions help differentiate.

Naming Consistency5/5

Both tools follow a clear verb_noun pattern ('send_json', 'send_message'), making the naming consistent and predictable.

Tool Count2/5

With only 2 tools, the server feels too minimal for typical webhook interactions. Even basic functionality like managing endpoints or checking delivery status is missing, suggesting the scope is too narrow.

Completeness2/5

The tool surface is severely incomplete for a webhook server. There are no tools for configuration, validation, or testing of webhooks, which are essential for real-world use.

Maintenance

ActivityInactive
ResponsivenessNo issues

Resources

Related MCP Connectors

  • VibeKitA
    io.github.VibeKit-Bot

    Build, deploy, and operate hosted web apps on VibeKit (vibekit.bot) from any MCP client.

    Cloud PlatformsDeveloper Tools
    3621
  • whatsappOAuth
    io.2chat

    WhatsApp (Web + Business API), SMS, contacts, and call records via 2Chat's MCP server.

    CommunicationCRM
    1
  • WhatsMCP: MCP for WhatsAppAOAuth
    com.whatsmcp.app

    WhatsMCP connects Claude and other MCP-compatible AI agents directly to WhatsApp. Send and receive text, images, documents, and voice notes; manage groups (create, add/remove members, promote admins); look up contacts and profiles; follow channels; and read call and message history — all through a standard MCP interface. For voice use cases, WhatsMCP offers SIP-based calling plans (inbound-only, or full inbound/outbound) so AI voice agents can answer and place WhatsApp calls, plus low-latency WebSocket integrations with voice agent providers like ElevenLabs. Multiple WhatsApp accounts can be paired and managed per workspace, with webhook support for real-time inbound message delivery to your own infrastructure.

    App AutomationCommunicationSocial Media
    361
  • AgentCouchOAuth
    dev.agentcouch

    Hosted MCP messaging across owners, tools, and machines, with readable transcripts.

    Agent OrchestrationCommunication
    2

Related MCP Servers

  • notify_me_mcp

    thesammykins
    A
    license
    B
    quality
    D
    maintenance
    Enables sending rich notifications to Discord and/or Slack webhooks with automatic service detection, retry logic, and support for embeds, blocks, and attachments. Provides secure webhook management with comprehensive input validation and rate limiting.
    3
    TypeScript
    MIT

  • MCP Webhook Server

    siendomiguel
    F
    license
    Not graded
    quality
    Not graded
    maintenance
    An MCP server that enables sending data to webhooks via HTTP POST for both local and remote team environments. It provides a tool for relaying task descriptions, custom metadata, and automated notifications to external services.
    4 npm
    -

Appeared in Searches