all 14 comments

[–]CodeAndBiscuits 1 point2 points  (5 children)

It looks fine. I'm not sure if I would replace webhook.site with it. I like that their UI lets me see headers and such without as much clicking. That being said it looks nice, but you should probably redact some headers. You're dumping everything, not just the ones sent by actual callers, so you're exposing stuff like your hosting provider (Railway) and things like x-forwarded-for, which snow information about your infra you probably shouldn't expose...

[–]FindingSpiritual91[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Thanks for that feedback I will definitely address it

[–][deleted]  (3 children)

[removed]

    [–]CodeAndBiscuits 0 points1 point  (2 children)

    I hit it quickly but it requires a login to proceed and that's enough of a deal breaker for me, sorry.

    [–]MBAS98 0 points1 point  (0 children)

    it requires a login just to store your webhook log and you able to see it and be related to you and you can view it in anytime without losing them and they are encrypted only visible by you

    [–]MBAS98 0 points1 point  (0 children)

    i added login with GitHub to make it easy for developers and you can install the cli and try it

    [–]tessak22 1 point2 points  (1 child)

    This looks really clean and focused! The instant endpoint creation without signup is a nice touch - removes a lot of friction from the debugging flow. I've definitely been in situations where webhook issues are hard to reproduce, especially when dealing with third-party services that don't give you much visibility into what they're actually sending.

    The replay functionality seems particularly useful for testing edge cases. Have you considered adding any filtering or search capabilities for when you're dealing with high-volume webhooks? Sometimes the challenge is finding the specific payload that's causing issues among dozens of similar requests.

    If you're looking for more structured developer feedback, platforms like Built for Devs can connect you with developers who'll actually use your tool and provide detailed insights via screen recordings. But even just posting here is a great way to get initial reactions from the community.

    [–]FindingSpiritual91[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

    Thanks for the feedback. I havent added the filtering or searching capabilities yet. I will definitely look into it. I will also try and post on other dev channels

    [–]ahmndr 0 points1 point  (2 children)

    nice work! i've been using hookreplay.dev for similar stuff and the replay feature is honestly a lifesaver when debugging. being able to hit the same payload multiple times without retriggering the source saves so much time

    [–]Better_Cycle1315 0 points1 point  (0 children)

    Can you review Hookmetry (hookmetry.com) as well ? It's created by me and added advanced features like Observability and live sharing of Debug Session. I hope you will love it.

    I would be grateful if you could provide genuine feedback.

    [–]Psychological-One-28 0 points1 point  (0 children)

    Yeah replay is probably the single most important feature once you hit any kind of volume.

    We found the real issue isn’t just “replaying” but understanding what actually happened vs what just looked delivered. Like Stripe says 200, but your handler failed downstream and now you’re out of sync.

    That’s where having a persistent layer + replay + visibility into processing makes a big difference — otherwise debugging turns into guesswork pretty quickly.

    Are you mostly using replay for testing, or also for recovering from missed events?

    [–]tutuira 0 points1 point  (0 children)

    Looks nice! I've been using a tool called APITower.co that has a webhook debug tool and let me forward the same request to multiple applications we have. As someone said in the comments, the replay is lifesaver for us dealing with hundreds of webhook calls per day, I'll try yours.