Skip to main content
Glama
klodr

mercury-invoicing-mcp

mercury_list_webhooks

List all registered webhook endpoints in your Mercury workspace to audit configurations, find webhook IDs before updates or deletions, or verify that delivery targets are active.

Instructions

List all webhook endpoints configured for your Mercury workspace.

USE WHEN: enumerating registered webhook endpoints — for audit, finding a webhook ID before update/delete, or to confirm a delivery target is registered.

DO NOT USE: to inspect webhook delivery history (Mercury exposes that only via the dashboard, not the API).

RETURNS: { webhooks: [{ id, url, status, events, ... }] }.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Implementation Reference

  • The handler function for mercury_list_webhooks: calls client.get('/webhooks') and returns the result via textResult.
      async () => {
        const data = await client.get("/webhooks");
        return textResult(data);
      },
    );
  • Empty input schema ({}) for mercury_list_webhooks — no parameters required.
    {},
  • Registration via defineTool() inside registerWebhookTools(), called from src/tools/index.ts (line 37).
    export function registerWebhookTools(server: McpServer, client: MercuryClient): void {
      defineTool(
        server,
        "mercury_list_webhooks",
        [
          "List all webhook endpoints configured for your Mercury workspace.",
          "",
          "USE WHEN: enumerating registered webhook endpoints — for audit, finding a webhook ID before update/delete, or to confirm a delivery target is registered.",
          "",
          "DO NOT USE: to inspect webhook delivery history (Mercury exposes that only via the dashboard, not the API).",
          "",
          "RETURNS: `{ webhooks: [{ id, url, status, events, ... }] }`.",
        ].join("\n"),
        {},
        async () => {
          const data = await client.get("/webhooks");
          return textResult(data);
        },
      );
  • defineTool helper function that wraps the handler and registers the tool on the MCP server.
    export function defineTool<S extends ZodRawShape>(
      server: McpServer,
      name: string,
      description: string,
      inputSchema: S,
      handler: (args: z.infer<z.ZodObject<S>>) => Promise<ToolResult>,
    ): void {
      const wrapped = wrapToolHandler(name, handler);
      const strictSchema = z.object(inputSchema).strict();
      server.registerTool(name, { description, inputSchema: strictSchema }, wrapped);
    }
  • Top-level registration: registerWebhookTools(server, client) is called inside registerAllTools().
      registerWebhookTools(server, client);
    }
Behavior4/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears the full burden. It states the return format but does not disclose behavioral details like rate limits, auth requirements, or idempotency. However, for a simple list operation with no parameters, the description is sufficiently transparent about its behavior.

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 extremely concise with three sentences plus structured USE/DO NOT USE and RETURNS sections. Every piece of information earns its place without any fluff.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity (0 parameters, no nested objects, no output schema but return format described), the description is complete. It provides purpose, usage guidelines, and return structure, fully enabling an agent to decide when to invoke it.

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 has 0 parameters and schema description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 4. The description does not need to add parameter semantics, and it correctly omits any parameter discussion.

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 'List all webhook endpoints' with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like mercury_get_webhook (single webhook) and mercury_create_webhook by being a listing operation.

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?

The description provides explicit 'USE WHEN' scenarios (audit, finding ID for update/delete) and a 'DO NOT USE' note to avoid using it for delivery history, which is only available via dashboard. This clearly guides the agent on when to select this tool.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/klodr/mercury-invoicing-mcp'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server