Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Penpot MCP Server

Penpot MCP Server

by zcube
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

create_webhook

Create a webhook for team event notifications: supply team ID, POST URL, and content type to receive event alerts.

Instructions

Create a new webhook for team event notifications

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": {
      "teamId": "<teamId>",
      "uri": "<uri>",
      "mtype": "<mtype>"
    },
    "name": "create_webhook"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
uriYesWebhook URL to receive POST requests
mtypeYesContent type for webhook payloads
teamIdYesTeam ID to create webhook for

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.0.0

TDQS

A3.5/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, and the description only states the creation action without disclosing behavioral traits such as side effects, permissions, delivery behavior, or error handling. The phrase 'for team event notifications' offers minimal context but not meaningful behavioral transparency.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence with no unnecessary words. It is concise and to the point, making it easy to scan.

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 create operation, the basic purpose is covered, but the description lacks behavioral details, return value expectations, or prerequisites. Given the absence of annotations and output schema, it is only minimally 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?

The input schema covers 100% of parameters with clear descriptions and an enum for mtype. The tool description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond the schema, aligning with the baseline score of 3.

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 uses a specific verb ('Create') with a clear resource ('webhook') and context ('for team event notifications'), which distinguishes it from sibling tools like update_webhook, delete_webhook, and list_webhooks.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description implies usage for creating a new webhook but does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use it. Sibling webhook management tools exist, but no comparison is provided.

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