Skip to main content
Glama
redditapis

RedditAPIs

by redditapis
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Remote

reddit_monitor_webhook_create

Create a webhook to receive Reddit monitor matches. Requires an active monitoring plan; returns a signing secret shown once.

Instructions

Register a delivery target for monitors to send matches to. Requires an active monitoring plan (a webhook with no plan could never receive anything). Returns the webhook with its signing secret SHOWN ONCE -- store it immediately, it is never returned again by reddit_monitor_webhook_list. HTTPS only; the URL is re-validated (including a fresh DNS check) at every delivery, not just at creation.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
urlYesHTTPS URL to deliver matches to. Must be publicly reachable HTTPS, no embedded credentials, no loopback/private/link-local address.
kindNoPayload shape to send. PREFER OMITTING THIS: for a hooks.slack.com or discord.com/api/webhooks URL the kind is inferred from the host, and the response reports what it inferred in `kind_inferred_from`. 'slack'/'discord' format as native incoming-webhook messages; 'webhook' sends redditapis' generic signed JSON envelope and is the fallback only for a host we do not recognise; 'email' is not yet a real delivery transport. Passing 'webhook' for a Slack or Discord URL does NOT force the generic envelope (that combination can never deliver -- Slack answers 400 invalid_payload); the host wins and `kind_corrected_from` says so. Passing one SPECIFIC kind for a different platform's host (e.g. 'discord' with a hooks.slack.com URL) is refused with `webhook_kind_mismatch` (400) rather than stored.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Addedv0.5.3

TDQS

A4.7/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations only declare readOnlyHint=false, openWorldHint=true, destructiveHint=false. The description adds crucial behavior: the signing secret is shown once and never again, the URL is re-validated with a fresh DNS check at every delivery, and an active plan is required. 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?

Four sentences, each carrying distinct information: purpose, prerequisite, secret handling, and validation. Front-loaded with the core action and no wasted words.

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?

No output schema, so the description correctly explains the critical return value (the one-time secret) and the operational constraints (plan required, HTTPS only, re-validation). Together with the rich schema, an agent has everything needed to call it safely.

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?

Schema coverage is 100% and both parameters are well described in the schema. The description adds one URL-related behavior—HTTPS only and re-validation at every delivery—which meaningfully supplements the schema's creation-time constraints.

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 verb ('Register') and resource ('delivery target for monitors'), and distinguishes from sibling reddit_monitor_webhook_list by noting the secret is never returned there. An agent can identify it as the webhook-creation tool without opening the schema.

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?

Adds a clear prerequisite—an active monitoring plan—and explains why (a webhook with no plan could never receive anything). It doesn't name alternative tools like webhook_test or delete, but the context for when this tool applies is explicit.

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