Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

HTTPfy network & DNS tools

by io.httpfy
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Certificate transparency search

certificate_transparency_search
Read-onlyIdempotent

List certificates logged in Certificate Transparency for a domain (via crt.sh): issuer, validity window and names, with a summary by issuer.

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": {
      "domain": "<domain>"
    },
    "name": "certificate_transparency_search"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
domainYesDomain (example.com)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuine behavioral context beyond them: the external dependency (crt.sh) and the shape of the result (issuer, validity window, names, plus an issuer summary), which tells the agent what to expect from an otherwise undocumented response. It omits operational traits such as upstream rate limiting or that CT logs typically surface subdomain certificates too.

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?

A single well-formed sentence that front-loads the verb and resource, then parenthetically names the data source, then enumerates returned fields. There is no filler and nothing that could be cut without losing information.

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?

For a one-parameter read-only lookup with no output schema, the definition covers purpose, source, and returned fields — enough to call it correctly, especially with annotations carrying safety semantics. Minor gaps remain on volatility, result size, and how the data differs from the sibling live-certificate check.

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 single parameter is fully documented in the schema at 100% coverage, including an example format, so the baseline is 3. The description adds no meaning beyond that — it does not clarify whether the domain should be apex-only versus a subdomain, or whether wildcards in results are included.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description opens with a specific verb and resource ('List certificates logged in Certificate Transparency for a domain') and names the upstream source (crt.sh), so the operation is unambiguous. It does not explicitly differentiate itself from the sibling ssl_certificate_check, which checks a live endpoint's certificate rather than log history, leaving the agent to infer the distinction from the wording.

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?

Usage is implied rather than stated: the phrase 'for a domain' signals the input scope, and the CT-log framing hints at historical/logged certificates. There is no explicit when-to-use guidance, no note on when to prefer ssl_certificate_check for a live certificate, and no mention of exclusions or prerequisites.

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

All HTTPfy network & DNS tools toolsInspect
Try in Browser
One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources