Skip to main content
Glama

Control Plane

by io.cpln

Set TLS on a Domain Listener

set_domain_tls
DestructiveIdempotent

Set or replace the TLS block on a port listener (cipher suites, minimum protocol version). Provide the complete TLS shape; existing TLS settings on this listener are overwritten. Recommended reading before first use: get_cpln_skill("domain") — the runbook for this tool family (read once per session).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
orgYesOrganization slug (lowercase kebab-case). NEVER guess — if the user has not named one, ask. On org-not-found, stop and ask; do not retry variants.
tlsYesTLS configuration for the listener (cipher suites, min protocol, and optional custom server/client certificates).
domainYesFully qualified domain name.
portNumberYesExisting listener port number to target.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
okYesWhether the call succeeded.
dataNoThe full machine-readable result — list rows, the resource object, query results. Read THIS, not just the summary.
summaryYesOne-line summary of the result.
nextStepsNoRecommended follow-up actions for this task, in order.

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

The annotations already indicate destructive and idempotent behavior, and the description adds crucial context: 'existing TLS settings on this listener are overwritten.' This goes beyond the generic hints and clarifies the replace semantics. It also advises reading a runbook before first use, which sets expectations for the operation.

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 three sentences, front-loaded with the core action, then the critical overwrite warning, and a useful pointer to the runbook. Every sentence earns its place, with no redundancy or filler.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the tool's complexity (nested TLS object, 4 required params) and the presence of an output schema, the description covers the key behavioral aspects and even provides a learning resource. It could mention more about return values, but the output schema likely handles that. The pointer to the runbook fills any remaining gaps.

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 provides 100% description coverage for all four parameters, including the nested TLS object with subfields. The description adds no new parameter-level detail, but the schema already documents each field thoroughly. The baseline of 3 is appropriate since the schema carries the burden.

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 clearly states the verb ('Set or replace') and the resource ('TLS block on a port listener'), with specific scope (cipher suites, minimum protocol version). It also differentiates from siblings by emphasizing replacement/overwrite semantics, which is distinct from tools like clear_domain_tls.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

The description provides clear context for when to use the tool: whenever setting or replacing TLS on a listener. It explicitly warns to provide the complete TLS shape and that existing settings are overwritten. However, it doesn't explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use it, though it does recommend consulting the runbook, which provides additional guidance.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

All Control Plane toolsInspect
Try in Browser
RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A4.1/5.0
Disambiguation5/5

Every tool targets a distinct resource/action pair (e.g., get_resource vs get_resource_schema, list_deployments vs list_workload_replicas) and descriptions clearly differentiate purposes. No two tools appear to do the same thing.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tools follow a verb_noun snake_case pattern (create_gvc, update_workload, list_resources, query_metrics) with consistent verbs. The few imperative verbs (browse, build, mount) still maintain the same verb-first structure.

Tool Count1/5

With 55 tools, this server far exceeds the typical well-scoped 3-15 tool range. While each tool appears purposeful, the sheer number creates selection overhead and falls into the extreme 50+ category on the rubric.

Completeness4/5

The surface covers nearly the full Control Plane lifecycle: CRUD for GVC, workload, identity, policy, volumeset, and domain, plus observability, templates, image builds, and Terraform. Minor gaps include referenced but missing configure_workload_* tools and no secret creation/deletion (by design).

Resources