Skip to main content
Glama
RMITBLOG

Parallels RAS MCP Server

by RMITBLOG
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Remote

Certificates

ras_infra_get_certificates
Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieve SSL/TLS certificate inventory for a Parallels RAS farm to audit names, expiration dates, issuers, and usage. Check upcoming expirations and verify assignments.

Instructions

Certificate inventory for the RAS farm — names, expiration dates, issuers, and usage. Use this to audit SSL/TLS certificates, check for upcoming expirations, or verify assignments.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNoMax rows after filtering. Default 50, max 200. Prefer narrowing with `filter` over raising the limit.
fieldsNoTop-level keys to keep on each row. Unknown keys are dropped. Use this to shrink large responses to only the columns you need.
filterNoEquality filter on top-level fields (AND across keys). String values match case-insensitively.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed4 schema fields changedv1.3.0
    • addedInput schema / additionalProperties
      Added value: +false
    • addedInput schema / properties / fields
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Top-level keys to keep on each row. Unknown keys are dropped. Use this to shrink large responses to only the columns you need.",
+  "items": {
+    "type": "string"
+  },
+  "type": "array"
+}
    • addedInput schema / properties / filter
      Added value: +{
+  "additionalProperties": {
+    "type": [
+      "string",
+      "number",
+      "boolean"
+    ]
+  },
+  "description": "Equality filter on top-level fields (AND across keys). String values match case-insensitively.",
+  "type": "object"
+}
    • addedInput schema / properties / limit
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Max rows after filtering. Default 50, max 200. Prefer narrowing with `filter` over raising the limit.",
+  "maximum": 200,
+  "minimum": 1,
+  "type": "integer"
+}
  2. First observedv1.0.0

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is fully covered without description help. The description adds the useful detail of what each row contains, but says nothing about result size, pagination, or default limits beyond what the schema states. Adequate but not rich.

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?

Two sentences with zero padding: the first defines the resource and its columns, the second lists the tasks it supports. Front-loaded and every clause carries 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?

With no output schema, the description appropriately compensates by naming the returned columns, and the read-only annotation covers the operation's semantics. It is essentially complete for a simple inventory getter, with only minor absence of result-size expectations.

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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, with limit, fields, and filter each documented in detail (defaults, maxima, case-insensitive matching, key-dropping). The description adds no parameter-level guidance beyond the schema, so the baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific resource (SSL/TLS certificate inventory for the RAS farm) and even enumerates the returned fields (names, expiration dates, issuers, usage). This clearly separates it from siblings like ras_infra_get_agents or ras_infra_get_gateway_status, though it does not explicitly name a sibling it is distinct from.

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?

Gives three concrete use cases — auditing certificates, checking upcoming expirations, and verifying assignments — which tell the agent exactly when to reach for this tool over other infra getters. It stops short of stating when not to use it or naming an alternative, so it falls short of a 5.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools