Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Traefik MCP Server

Traefik MCP Server

by gaelhc
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Hybrid

get_entrypoint

Retrieve Traefik entrypoint details or list all entrypoints to inspect reverse proxy listeners and their configuration.

Instructions

Get informations about entrypoints

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "get_entrypoint"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameNo[Optional] Name of the entrypoint (return detailled informations)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.0.0

TDQS

C2.6/5.0
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 disclosure burden. It does not state that this is a read-only operation, what happens when a name does not match an existing entrypoint, or what the response contains; the only hint (detail vs. list) lives in the schema, not the description.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The definition is a single short sentence with no padding, and the key resource is front-loaded. It is terse rather than bloated, though the phrasing 'informations' is imprecise.

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 simple read tool with one optional parameter this could be complete, but with no annotations and no output schema the description should explain the list-vs-detail behavior and the shape of the result. It leaves the agent to guess what 'informations' covers.

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 coverage is 100% and the single optional 'name' parameter is already described in the schema as returning detailed information. The description adds no further meaning beyond that, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 names a specific resource (entrypoints) with the verb 'get', so an agent can distinguish it from siblings like get_router or get_service. However, 'informations' is vague and does not state what attributes of an entrypoint are returned, leaving the actual purpose only implied.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus siblings such as get_overview, and no explanation of the important behavioral fork implied by the optional name parameter (list all entrypoints vs. detail one). The agent must infer this from the schema alone.

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