System Design/openai/Design a Webhook Delivery Platform

Design a Webhook Delivery Platform

HARD45 minDistributed SystemsWebhooksEvent Driven ArchitectureRetriesIdempotencyRate LimitingMulti TenancyObservabilityAPI Design
Reported at: OpenAI

Design a multi-tenant webhook platform with durable delivery, signed requests, retry scheduling, rate control, replay, and operational visibility.

Independent OpenAI candidate reports describe a webhook delivery design round, including one explicitly focused on billions of requests and deep reliability follow-ups. This exercise turns that reported signal into a complete practice problem without claiming access to OpenAI's internal rubric.

What Candidates Reported

Two firsthand OpenAI software-engineering reports describe a webhook platform. One report specifies customer endpoint lookup and retries for twenty-four hours; a later report emphasizes billions of requests, reliability, performance, and implementation detail. The shared signal is strong enough for company-specific practice, while exact interviewer follow-ups may vary.

Problem and Scope

Design durable event acceptance, endpoint configuration, signed HTTP delivery, retries, status inspection, and replay. Clarify delivery guarantees, retryable status codes, tenant controls, payload limits, retention, and what the acceptance response proves before choosing storage or queue technology.

Critical Design Decisions

The hard parts are durable acknowledgement, explicit attempt state, retry scheduling, and fairness under failure amplification. A strong design separates event facts from delivery attempts, versions endpoint secrets, uses leases or equivalent recovery for workers, controls concurrency per tenant and destination, and makes duplicates observable rather than pretending they cannot occur.

Failure Scenarios to Practise

Pressure-test the system with a lost success response, a destination failing for hours, a hot tenant, secret rotation during backlog, worker death after send, poison payloads, delayed scheduler recovery, operator replay, and regional storage failure. For each case, explain durable state, the next permitted action, and the metric that reveals trouble.

How the Answer Is Evaluated

MockMe scores scope and delivery semantics (15%), architecture and state (20%), scale and tenant fairness (25%), reliability and security (25%), and communication and trade-offs (15%). High scores require a defensible acknowledgement boundary, bounded duplicate semantics, durable retries, downstream protection, and a concrete recovery model.

Sources

Ready to practice this question?

Run a mock system design interview with AI coaching and detailed feedback.