Skip to main content
Glama
jrelph

RIPE Atlas MCP Server

by jrelph

RIPE Atlas TLS Certificate Measurement

atlas_measure_tls

Retrieve TLS certificates from any target hostname via worldwide probes. Verify certificate details and validity across distributed vantage points.

Instructions

Create a TLS/SSL certificate check measurement on the RIPE Atlas network.

Connects to a target and retrieves its TLS certificate from distributed probes worldwide.

Args:

  • target (string): Target hostname or IP

  • port (1-65535): Port to connect to (default: 443)

  • probe_count, from_country, etc.: Probe selection

Returns: Measurement ID(s).

Requires: RIPE_ATLAS_API_KEY with 'create measurement' permission.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
targetYesTarget hostname or IP address
afNoAddress family: 4 for IPv4, 6 for IPv6
descriptionNoHuman-readable description of the measurement
is_oneoffNoIf true (default), run once. If false, run periodically at 'interval'
intervalNoInterval in seconds between measurements (only used when is_oneoff=false)
resolve_on_probeNoResolve DNS names on probe instead of RIPE servers
tagsNoTags to apply to the measurement
response_formatNoOutput format: 'json' for structured data or 'markdown' for human-readablejson
probe_countNoNumber of probes to use (1-1000, default: 5)
from_countryNoTwo-letter ISO country code to select probes from (e.g. 'DE', 'US')
from_asnNoASN number to select probes from
from_prefixNoIP prefix to select probes from (e.g. '193.0.0.0/21')
from_areaNoGeographic area to select probes from
from_probesNoComma-separated list of specific probe IDs to use
include_tagsNoOnly include probes with these tags (e.g. ['system-ipv6-works'])
exclude_tagsNoExclude probes with these tags
portNoPort to connect to (default: 443)
Behavior3/5

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

The description discloses that the tool creates a measurement (non-read-only) and requires specific API key permissions, adding value beyond the annotations (which only indicate readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, etc.). However, it does not mention behavioral details like cost implications, rate limits, or what happens to existing data.

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 description is concise: two introductory sentences, then a structured list of args, returns, and requirements. Every part adds value, though the list format could be more tightly integrated. It is front-loaded with the primary action.

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?

With 17 parameters and no output schema, the description is insufficient. It barely explains the return value ('Measurement ID(s)') and omits details on output format despite a response_format parameter. No error handling or prerequisites beyond API key are mentioned, making it incomplete for a complex tool.

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%, so the baseline is 3. The description lists parameter names (target, port, probe_count, etc.) but adds no significant extra meaning beyond the schema's own descriptions. It is redundant rather than enhancing understanding.

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

Purpose5/5

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

The description clearly states the action ('Create') and the resource ('TLS/SSL certificate check measurement'), with specifics about retrieving TLS certificates from distributed probes. It distinguishes this from sibling tools like atlas_measure_ping or atlas_measure_dns by focusing on TLS certificate retrieval.

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?

The description lists required permissions (RIPE_ATLAS_API_KEY with 'create measurement' permission) and indicates usage for TLS certificate checking, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives or when not to use it. The sibling tools provide context, but no direct differentiation guidance.

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/jrelph/ripe-atlas-mcp'

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