Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
hooksense-mcp

hooksense-mcp

by ozers
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

replay_callback

Replay a received callback to a target URL with original headers and body, enabling testing of handlers against known payloads without re-triggering the upstream event.

Instructions

Replay a received callback to a target URL. The original headers and body are re-sent unchanged — useful to re-drive your handler against a known payload without re-triggering the upstream event.

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": {
      "requestId": "<requestId>",
      "targetUrl": "<targetUrl>"
    },
    "name": "replay_callback"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
requestIdYesCallback UUID to replay
targetUrlYesWhere to POST the replayed payload (e.g. http://localhost:3000/webhooks/stripe)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.2.0

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the full burden. It states headers and body are re-sent unchanged, which is a key behavioral trait, but does not cover error handling, idempotency, or rate limits.

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 sentences, front-loaded with purpose, no wasted words.

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 simple tool with two required params and no output schema, the description covers purpose, usage, and key behavior, though it could mention potential pitfalls like duplicate replays.

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 has 100% description coverage, so baseline is 3. The description does not add meaning beyond what the schema provides for the parameters.

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 tool replays a received callback to a target URL, which is a specific verb+resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like create_callback_endpoint or get_callback_payload.

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 provides a clear use case ('re-drive your handler against a known payload without re-triggering the upstream event') but does not explicitly mention when not to use it or alternatives.

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