Add Webhooks

[realadeel]

https://github.com/realadeel/awesome-webhooks

Webhooks are the backbone of real-time integrations across the modern web. This list curates resources for webhook providers, consumers, and developers — covering outgoing webhook APIs (Stripe, GitHub, Slack, etc.), incoming webhook endpoints, development/debugging tools, community resources, and educational content.

The list has been actively maintained for 10 years, has 227+ stars, 26 forks, and 16 contributors.

By submitting this pull request I confirm I've read and complied with the below requirements 🖖

• I have read and understood the instructions for creating a list.
• This pull request has a title in the format Add Name of List.
• The entry includes a short description that does not describe the list itself.
• The entry is added at the bottom of the appropriate category (Miscellaneous).
• The title of the entry is title-cased and the URL ends in #readme.
• The suggested Awesome list complies with the list requirements.
• The list has been around for at least 30 days (10 years).
• The default branch is named main.
• The repo has awesome-list and awesome as GitHub topics.
• Includes a succinct description at the top of the readme.
• Has a Table of Contents section named Contents.
• Has an appropriate license (CC0-1.0).
• Has contribution guidelines (contributing.md).
• Includes the Awesome badge.
• Entries have descriptions.
• Has consistent formatting.

[realadeel]

unicorn

[realadeel]

Reviewed PRs: #3949 and #3952

[jtarchie]

unicorn

[JackyST0]

I reviewed this PR. A few things I noticed:

1. Some entries appear to be deprecated — for example, Wunderlist was shut down by Microsoft in 2020.

2. The readme intro contains promotional text ("contact me on Twitter", "Share this list on Twitter") which would be better suited in contributing.md.

Overall the list is well-established and covers the topic thoroughly.

[levz0r]

Review of awesome-webhooks

I took a close look at the awesome-webhooks list. Here are my findings:

What's done well

• Long track record: The repo has been around since 2016 with 229 stars, 26 forks, and 16 contributors — genuine community involvement over time.
• Clear structure: The Contents section with Community, About Webhooks, Outgoing, Incoming, and Development Tools is logical and easy to navigate.
• Compliance basics: CC0-1.0 license, awesome-list and awesome topics set, main as default branch, contributing.md present, Awesome badge included.
• The PR diff itself is clean: Entry is properly formatted, placed in Miscellaneous at the bottom, title-cased, URL ends with #readme, and the description is concise and descriptive.

Issues that should be addressed

1. Defunct/deprecated services in the Outgoing section

Several entries link to services that no longer exist or have been substantially rebranded. A curated list should not include dead links. Examples:

• Wunderlist — shut down by Microsoft in May 2020, replaced by Microsoft To Do.
• Api.ai — renamed to Dialogflow (Google) in 2017.
• Cisco Spark — rebranded to Webex Teams in 2018.
• Context.io — shut down in 2020/2021.
• FluidSurveys — shut down by SurveyMonkey in 2016.
• ExactTarget — absorbed into Salesforce Marketing Cloud years ago.
• Crowdflower — rebranded to Figure Eight (2018), then acquired by Appen.
• Doorman — appears to be defunct.

These should be removed or updated to their current names/URLs.

2. Promotional language in the README intro

The intro contains "contact me on Twitter @_adeel" and a "Share this list on Twitter" link. Per awesome list guidelines, the README should focus on the curated content. Self-promotion and social sharing CTAs should be removed or moved to contributing.md.

3. Questionable entry in Development Tools

"Vedika API" is described as a "Vedic astrology API with webhook support." This is not a webhook development tool — it's a domain-specific API that happens to support webhooks. By that logic, thousands of APIs could be listed. This entry does not fit the section and dilutes the list's curation quality.

4. Formatting inconsistency between sections

The Outgoing section uses the format - [Name](url) - [docs](url) (no description, just a docs link), while the Incoming section mostly uses - [Name](url) - Description. However, Pipedream in Incoming uses the Outgoing-style format (- [Pipedream](url) - [docs](url)) without a description. This inconsistency should be resolved — ideally, every entry in every section should have a short description explaining what it is, as per the awesome list requirements ("Entries have descriptions").

5. Missing notable modern webhook providers

The Outgoing list is heavily weighted toward 2015-2017 era services and is missing many major modern webhook providers. Some notable omissions:

• Discord (widely used for bot/app webhooks)
• Twitch (EventSub webhooks)
• Linear (project management webhooks)
• Notion (automations/webhooks)
• Supabase (database webhooks)
• Vercel (deployment webhooks)
• Datadog (monitoring webhooks)
• Clerk (auth webhooks)
• Resend (email webhooks)

Adding these would significantly improve the list's current relevance.

6. Many documentation links are likely broken

Given that many entries are 8-10 years old, a significant number of the [docs] links in the Outgoing section are likely broken (companies frequently restructure their developer docs). A link check pass would be valuable.

7. Alphabetical ordering not consistent in Development Tools

Entries in the Development Tools section are not strictly alphabetically ordered (e.g., "Webhook Debugger" entries appear after "webhook.site", "WebReducer" comes after "Webhook Wizard"). This should be cleaned up.

Summary

The list covers a real, well-defined topic and has a genuine 10-year history, which is commendable. However, the curation quality needs improvement before it meets the standard expected of an awesome list. The main concerns are: (1) multiple defunct services that should be pruned, (2) promotional text in the intro, (3) at least one off-topic entry, and (4) missing major modern providers that would make the list more useful today.

I'd recommend asking the maintainer to address items 1-4 before merging.

[wolffcatskyy]

Several issues with this PR:

1. Checklist format: The PR uses a simplified checklist that does not match the required pull_request_template.md. Many required checkboxes from the template are missing entirely (e.g., logo requirement, hard-wrapping, CI badge check, etc.).

2. PR reviews missing: The updated template requires reviewing at least 4 other open PRs with detailed feedback. The PR body does not mention any reviews. This is a required step per the guidelines.

3. unicorn confirmation: The template requires posting the word unicorn as a comment to confirm all guidelines were read. This is not present in the body.

4. Description ends without period: The entry description in the PR body ends with "...and educational content." — that's fine. But the actual diff should be checked to confirm the added line in readme.md also ends with a period.

5. URL missing #readme: The submitted URL https://github.com/realadeel/awesome-webhooks is missing the required #readme suffix. The entry in readme.md should link to https://github.com/realadeel/awesome-webhooks#readme.

6. Logo: The list doesn't appear to have a logo/illustration at the top of the readme, which is a requirement ("whenever possible").

🤖 This review was generated by Claude AI assisting a maintainer.

[webmaxru]

[Nitpick}: The PR coment only lists 2 reviewed PRs while the requirement is at least 4.

[luka2chat]

Useful topic! The list needs some updates to meet current guidelines:

• The Contents section includes descriptions for each entry (e.g., [Community](#community) - Web communities to discuss webhooks.). The TOC should only contain section links without descriptions.
• The top of the README has "Please contribute to this list by pull request or contact me on Twitter" and a "Share this list on Twitter" link. These should be removed — contribution info belongs in contributing.md, and social sharing prompts are not part of the awesome list format.
• Many entries in the "Outgoing" section only have [Name](url) - [docs](url) without actual descriptions of what the service does.
• The list was created in 2016 — some links are likely outdated (e.g., api.ai has been renamed to Dialogflow). Running a link checker would help.

[sindresorhus]

Closing for lack of response.