shipmail_get_webhookRetrieve a webhook endpoint configuration using its unique ID to view or verify settings.
Fetch webhook endpoint configuration by ID.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| id | Yes | ShipMail resource ID. |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| webhook | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.
v0.1.10Input schema / $schemaPrevious value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"New value: +"https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema"Output schema / $schemaPrevious value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"New value: +"https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema"Output schema / properties / webhook / properties / events / items / enumPrevious value: -[
- "message.received",
- "message.sent",
- "message.delivered",
- "message.bounced",
- "message.complained",
- "domain.verified",
- "domain.verification_failed",
- "domain.degraded",
- "org.reputation_warning",
- "org.sending_throttled",
- "org.sending_suspended",
- "org.reputation_recovered"
-]New value: +[
+ "message.received",
+ "message.sent",
+ "message.delivered",
+ "message.bounced",
+ "message.complained",
+ "mailbox.rule_matched",
+ "domain.verified",
+ "domain.verification_failed",
+ "domain.degraded",
+ "org.reputation_warning",
+ "org.sending_throttled",
+ "org.sending_suspended",
+ "org.reputation_recovered"
+]v0.1.9Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so 'Fetch' aligns. No additional behavioral context (e.g., error handling, permissions) is provided beyond annotations.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
Single sentence front-loaded with verb and resource. No extraneous words; perfectly concise.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
For a simple get operation with output schema, the description is complete. It could mention that it returns the configuration, but it's not necessary given the output schema.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema coverage is 100% with the 'id' parameter well-described. The description adds 'by ID' but does not enrich understanding beyond what the schema provides.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description uses a specific verb 'Fetch' and clearly identifies the resource as 'webhook endpoint configuration' with the scope 'by ID'. This distinguishes it from list and create/update siblings effectively.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
No explicit guidance on when to use versus alternatives like 'shipmail_list_webhooks'. Usage is implied by the name and description but not stated directly.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.
curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/shipmail-to/shipmail-mcp'
If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server