Skip to main content
Glama

create_ssl

Generate SSL certificates for secure communication by providing certificate, private key, and optional parameters like SNI or client configurations.

Instructions

Create an SSL certificate

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idNoSSL certificate ID
sslYesSSL certificate configuration object

Implementation Reference

  • The handler function registered for the "create_ssl" tool. It extracts the id from args and either POSTs the ssl config to /ssls (create) or PUTs to /ssls/{id} (update) using makeAdminAPIRequest.
    server.tool("create_ssl", "Create an SSL certificate", CreateSSLSchema.shape, async (args) => {
      const sslId = args.id;
      if (!sslId) {
        return await makeAdminAPIRequest(`/ssls`, "POST", args.ssl);
      } else {
        return await makeAdminAPIRequest(`/ssls/${sslId}`, "PUT", args.ssl);
      }
    });
  • Zod input schema for the create_ssl tool, with optional id and required ssl object based on SSLSchema.
    export const CreateSSLSchema = z.object({
      id: z.string().optional().describe("SSL certificate ID"),
      ssl: SSLSchema,
    });
  • Detailed Zod schema for SSL configuration object used within CreateSSLSchema for the create_ssl tool.
    export const SSLSchema = z
      .object({
        label: z.string().optional().describe("SSL label"),
        cert: z.string().describe("SSL certificate in PEM format"),
        certs: z.array(z.string()).optional().describe("SSL certificates in PEM format"),
        key: z.string().describe("SSL private key in PEM format"),
        keys: z.array(z.string()).optional().describe("SSL private keys in PEM format"),
        sni: z.string().optional().describe("Server Name Indication"),
        snis: z.array(z.string()).optional().describe("Server Name Indications"),
        client: z
          .object({
            ca: z.string().describe("SSL client CA certificate in PEM format"),
            depth: z.number().optional().default(1).describe("SSL client verification depth"),
            skip_mtls_uri_regex: z.array(z.string()).optional().describe("URIs to skip mTLS verification"),
          })
          .optional()
          .describe("SSL client configuration"),
        type: z.enum(["server", "client"]).optional().default("server").describe("SSL type"),
        status: StatusSchema.optional().describe("SSL certificate status"),
        validity_start: z.number().optional().describe("SSL certificate validity start timestamp"),
        validity_end: z.number().optional().describe("SSL certificate validity end timestamp"),
      })
      .passthrough()
      .describe("SSL certificate configuration object");
  • src/index.ts:27-27 (registration)
    High-level registration call that invokes setupSSLTools to add the create_ssl tool (and others) to the MCP server.
    setupSSLTools(server);
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. 'Create an SSL certificate' implies a write operation that likely requires specific permissions and may have side effects (e.g., affecting gateway security). However, the description doesn't mention authentication needs, rate limits, whether the creation is idempotent, or what happens on failure. For a mutation tool with zero annotation coverage, this is a significant gap in transparency.

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 with zero waste—it directly states the tool's action. It's appropriately sized for a tool with a clear name and detailed schema, though this conciseness comes at the cost of missing contextual details.

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?

Given the complexity (2 parameters with nested objects, no output schema, and no annotations), the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain what the tool returns, error conditions, or how it fits into the broader system (e.g., Kong API Gateway context implied by sibling tools). For a creation tool with rich input schema but no behavioral context, more information is needed to guide effective use.

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%, meaning all parameters are documented in the schema itself (e.g., 'cert' as 'SSL certificate in PEM format'). The description adds no additional meaning about parameters beyond the tool name, which implies an 'ssl' object is needed. Since the schema does the heavy lifting, the baseline score of 3 is appropriate, but the description doesn't compensate with any high-level context about required vs. optional fields.

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 'Create an SSL certificate' clearly states the action (create) and resource (SSL certificate), which is better than a tautology. However, it doesn't distinguish this tool from sibling tools like 'update_ssl' or other creation tools in the list, nor does it specify what kind of SSL certificate is being created (e.g., for a gateway, service, or route). The purpose is understandable but lacks differentiation.

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. There's no mention of prerequisites (e.g., needing existing resources), when to choose this over 'update_ssl', or what context it applies to (e.g., for securing a specific service). Without such information, the agent must infer usage from the tool name alone, which is insufficient.

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

Related 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/api7/apisix-mcp'

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