Skip to main content
Glama
DynamicEndpoints

Palo Alto Device Server

manage_certificates

Manage SSL/TLS certificates on Palo Alto firewalls to maintain secure network communications and authentication.

Instructions

Manage certificates on the Palo Alto firewall

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Implementation Reference

  • Handler for the 'manage_certificates' tool. Fetches certificates from the Palo Alto firewall using a GET request to /Device/Certificates and returns the JSON response.
    case 'manage_certificates': {
        try {
            const response = await axios.get(
                `${API_BASE_URL}/Device/Certificates`,
                {
                    headers: {
                        'X-PAN-KEY': API_KEY,
                        'Accept': 'application/json'
                    }
                }
            );
    
            return {
                content: [
                    {
                        type: 'text',
                        text: JSON.stringify(response.data, null, 2),
                    },
                ],
            };
        } catch (error) {
            const axiosError = error as AxiosError;
            throw new McpError(
                ErrorCode.InternalError,
                `Palo Alto API error: ${axiosError.message}`
            );
        }
    }
  • src/index.ts:66-73 (registration)
    Registers the 'manage_certificates' tool in the list of available tools, including its name, description, and empty input schema.
    {
        name: 'manage_certificates',
        description: 'Manage certificates on the Palo Alto firewall',
        inputSchema: {
            type: 'object',
            properties: {},
        },
    },
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. 'Manage certificates' implies mutation operations (likely creating, deleting, or modifying certificates), but the description doesn't specify what types of operations are supported, what permissions are required, whether changes are destructive, or what the typical response looks like. This leaves significant behavioral uncertainty for a tool that likely performs administrative actions.

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 a single, efficient sentence that states the core functionality without unnecessary words. It's appropriately sized for a tool with no parameters and gets straight to the point with zero wasted verbiage.

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

Completeness2/5

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

For a tool that likely performs certificate management operations (which can include destructive actions like certificate deletion or replacement), the description is insufficiently complete. With no annotations, no output schema, and a vague description, an agent wouldn't understand what specific operations are available, what the tool actually does when invoked, or what to expect in return. The description doesn't compensate for the lack of structured metadata.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The tool has zero parameters (schema coverage is 100% by default with empty properties), so there are no parameters requiring semantic explanation. The description appropriately doesn't attempt to explain non-existent parameters, which meets the baseline expectation for parameterless tools.

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

Purpose3/5

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

The description states the general action ('manage') and resource ('certificates on the Palo Alto firewall'), which provides a basic understanding of purpose. However, it's vague about what specific operations are included in 'manage' (create, delete, list, renew, etc.) and doesn't distinguish this tool from potential sibling certificate-related tools (though none are listed among the provided siblings).

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention prerequisites, appropriate contexts, or exclusions. While the sibling tools list doesn't show obvious certificate-related alternatives, the description offers no usage context beyond the generic 'manage' statement.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/DynamicEndpoints/paloalto-device-server'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server