Skip to main content
Glama
mako10k

Web Proxy MCP Server

by mako10k

ssl_switch_ca

Change the Certificate Authority used by the Web Proxy MCP Server to manage SSL/TLS certificates for secure traffic monitoring.

Instructions

Switch to a different Certificate Authority

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
caNameYesName of the CA to switch to

Implementation Reference

  • The MCP tool handler for 'ssl_switch_ca' that validates input, calls SSLManager.switchCA, and returns formatted success response.
    case 'ssl_switch_ca':
      const switchResult = await this.sslManager.switchCA(args.caName);
      return {
        content: [{
          type: "text",
          text: `šŸ”„ Switched to CA: ${switchResult.caName}\nšŸ“ CA Directory: ${switchResult.caDir}`
        }]
      };
  • JSON schema definition for the 'ssl_switch_ca' tool input validation.
    ssl_switch_ca: {
      name: "ssl_switch_ca",
      description: "Switch to a different Certificate Authority",
      inputSchema: {
        type: "object",
        properties: {
          caName: {
            type: "string",
            description: "Name of the CA to switch to"
          }
        },
        required: ["caName"]
      }
    },
  • Core implementation of CA switching logic in SSLManager class: updates current CA path, verifies existence, loads metadata, and returns new configuration.
    async switchCA(caName) {
      this.currentCA = caName;
      this.caDir = path.join(this.caBaseDir, this.currentCA);
      
      const caExists = await this._checkCAExists();
      if (!caExists) {
        throw new Error(`CA '${caName}' does not exist`);
      }
    
      await this._loadCAInfo();
      return { caName, caDir: this.caDir };
    }
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 the action without behavioral details. It doesn't disclose if this is a destructive operation (e.g., affects active SSL configurations), requires specific permissions, has side effects, or what happens on success/failure, which is critical for a tool that likely modifies system state.

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, direct sentence with zero wasted words, making it highly concise and front-loaded. It efficiently communicates the core action without unnecessary elaboration.

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 tool's complexity (likely a mutation affecting SSL configuration), lack of annotations, and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It fails to explain behavioral aspects, return values, or error conditions, leaving significant gaps for safe and effective use by an AI agent.

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%, with the single parameter 'caName' documented as 'Name of the CA to switch to'. The description adds no additional meaning beyond this, such as format examples or constraints, so it meets the baseline for adequate but unenriched parameter context.

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 ('Switch') and resource ('Certificate Authority'), making the purpose understandable. However, it doesn't differentiate from sibling tools like 'ssl_ca_status' or 'ssl_create_ca', which would require more specificity about what 'switch' entails operationally.

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. It doesn't mention prerequisites (e.g., existing CAs), exclusions, or how it relates to siblings like 'ssl_ca_status' for checking status or 'ssl_create_ca' for creating new CAs, leaving the agent to infer usage context.

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