Skip to main content
Glama
mako10k

Web Proxy MCP Server

by mako10k

ssl_list_cas

Retrieve available Certificate Authorities to configure SSL/TLS certificates for secure proxy connections and traffic monitoring.

Instructions

List all available Certificate Authorities

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Implementation Reference

  • MCP tool handler for 'ssl_list_cas' that invokes SSLManager.listCAs() and formats the list of CAs as a formatted text response.
    case 'ssl_list_cas':
      const cas = await this.sslManager.listCAs();
      const caList = cas.map(ca => 
        `• ${ca.name} ${ca.current ? '(current)' : ''} - ${ca.exists ? '✅ Available' : '❌ Missing'}\n  Created: ${ca.created || 'Unknown'}\n  Description: ${ca.description || 'No description'}`
      ).join('\n\n');
      
      return {
        content: [{
          type: "text",
          text: `🔒 Available Certificate Authorities\n\n${caList || 'No CAs found'}`
        }]
      };
  • Core implementation of listing Certificate Authorities: scans ~/.ca directory for CA subdirectories, loads metadata, checks for ca.crt existence, and returns structured CA information.
    async listCAs() {
      try {
        await fs.access(this.caBaseDir);
        const entries = await fs.readdir(this.caBaseDir, { withFileTypes: true });
        const cas = [];
    
        for (const entry of entries) {
          if (entry.isDirectory()) {
            const caDir = path.join(this.caBaseDir, entry.name);
            const metadataPath = path.join(caDir, 'metadata.json');
            
            let metadata = { name: entry.name, created: null, description: null };
            try {
              const metadataContent = await fs.readFile(metadataPath, 'utf-8');
              metadata = { ...metadata, ...JSON.parse(metadataContent) };
            } catch (error) {
              // Metadata file doesn't exist or is corrupted
            }
    
            const caExists = await fs.access(path.join(caDir, 'ca.crt')).then(() => true).catch(() => false);
            
            cas.push({
              name: entry.name,
              path: caDir,
              exists: caExists,
              current: entry.name === this.currentCA,
              ...metadata
            });
          }
        }
    
        return cas;
      } catch (error) {
        return [];
      }
    }
  • Tool schema definition including name, description, and empty input schema (no parameters required).
    ssl_list_cas: {
      name: "ssl_list_cas",
      description: "List all available Certificate Authorities",
      inputSchema: {
        type: "object",
        properties: {}
      }
    },
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden but only states what the tool does, not how it behaves. It doesn't disclose if this is a read-only operation, what format the list returns, if there are rate limits, or any error conditions.

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, clear sentence with zero wasted words. It's front-loaded with the core purpose and efficiently communicates the essential information without unnecessary elaboration.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a simple list tool with no parameters and no output schema, the description is adequate but minimal. It lacks details about return format or behavioral context, which would be helpful given the absence of annotations.

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

Parameters4/5

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

The tool has 0 parameters, and schema coverage is 100%, so no parameter documentation is needed. The description appropriately doesn't mention parameters, earning a high baseline score for this dimension.

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?

The description clearly states the action ('List') and resource ('Certificate Authorities'), making the purpose immediately understandable. It doesn't differentiate from sibling tools like 'ssl_ca_status' or 'ssl_get_ca_certificate', which prevents a perfect score.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'ssl_ca_status' (which might check status) or 'ssl_get_ca_certificate' (which might retrieve a specific CA). The description lacks context about prerequisites or exclusions.

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/mako10k/mcp-web-proxy'

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