Skip to main content
Glama

Proxy Pool Export

proxy_pool_export

Dumps proxy pool state as JSON for backup or migration, with optional credential redaction to share safely or preserve credentials for reloading.

Instructions

Dump pool state — round-trippable via proxy_pool_load(format='json'). redact=False (default) emits real creds; redact=True for safe sharing.

Ex: proxy_pool_export() → {"rotation":"...","entries":[{...creds...}]}

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": "proxy_pool_export"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
redactNo

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

No annotations exist, so the description carries the full burden, and it does disclose the critical behavioral trait: by default real credentials are emitted, which is a security-relevant default. It also discloses the round-trip guarantee. It leaves unstated whether the data is written to a file or just returned, and says nothing about pool size/scale limits.

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?

Three short lines: action first, then the safety-relevant parameter default, then a compact concrete example. No filler, and the most decision-critical fact (credential exposure by default) is front-loaded.

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?

An output schema exists, so return shape need not be explained, and the description covers the action, the parameter semantics, and the security caveat. The only remaining ambiguity is where the 'dump' goes (file vs. return value) and whether it is strictly read-only, which the absent annotations leave uncovered.

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

Parameters5/5

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

Schema coverage is 0%, so the description must explain the single parameter — and it fully does: redact=False is the default and exposes real credentials, redact=True produces share-safe output. That is precisely the meaning an agent needs beyond the bare boolean in the schema.

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 verb and resource ('Dump pool state') and ties it to the inverse operation (proxy_pool_load) so the export/load pair is clear. It does not explicitly distinguish itself from proxy_pool_list or proxy_pool_health_check among the siblings, so sibling differentiation is only partial.

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 a concrete decision rule for the one knob: default emits real credentials, redact=True is for safe sharing, and the output is meant to be fed back through proxy_pool_load(format='json'). It does not say when to prefer this over proxy_pool_list for a quick read.

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