Dechonet MCP

SSL Certificate Check

ssl_check

Read-onlyIdempotent

Inspect a host's TLS/SSL certificate and connection to identify expiry, issuer, SAN, chain, TLS version, and HSTS problems, receiving an A-F grade for diagnosing HTTPS handshake issues.

Instructions

Inspect a host's served TLS/SSL certificate and connection: expiry date, issuer, SAN list, chain integrity, TLS version, and HSTS, returning an A+ to F grade weighted by certificate validity (40%), TLS version (25%), chain trust (15%), and HSTS (20%). Use this to diagnose certificate or HTTPS-handshake problems for one host. Use http_security instead to audit response security headers, or security_scan for an all-in-one domain report. Read-only: it completes a TLS handshake but sends no application data; requires no API key; rate-limited. Returns a text report: grade, expiry/issuer KPIs, issues, and actions.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`host`	Yes	Hostname to inspect, without scheme (e.g., 'example.com'). The host portion of a pasted URL is also accepted.
`port`	No	TCP port for the TLS handshake. Defaults to 443 (standard HTTPS); set this only for a non-standard HTTPS port such as 8443.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`kpis`	No	Key metrics as label/value pairs
`grade`	No	Letter grade (A+ to F) when the tool grades the target
`score`	No	0-100 score when the tool scores the target
`issues`	No	Detected problems, severity-rated
`status`	Yes	Overall verdict, e.g. 'good' \| 'warning' \| 'bad' \| 'info' \| 'unknown'
`actions`	No	Recommended next actions, most important first
`summary`	No	One-paragraph interpretation of the result
`reportUrl`	Yes	Human-facing interactive report for this exact lookup on dechonet.com

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedv1.1.0Sep 8, 2026

changedOutput schema / (root)

Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "$schema": "http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#",
+  "additionalProperties": false,
+  "properties": {
+    "actions": {
+      "description": "Recommended next actions, most important first",
+      "items": {
+        "type": "string"
+      },
+      "type": "array"
+    },
+    "grade": {
+      "description": "Letter grade (A+ to F) when the tool grades the target",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "issues": {
+      "description": "Detected problems, severity-rated",
+      "items": {
+        "additionalProperties": false,
+        "properties": {
+          "key": {
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "severity": {
+            "type": "string"
+          }
+        },
+        "required": [
+          "severity",
+          "key"
+        ],
+        "type": "object"
+      },
+      "type": "array"
+    },
+    "kpis": {
+      "description": "Key metrics as label/value pairs",
+      "items": {
+        "additionalProperties": false,
+        "properties": {
+          "label": {
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "value": {
+            "type": "string"
+          }
+        },
+        "required": [
+          "label",
+          "value"
+        ],
+        "type": "object"
+      },
+      "type": "array"
+    },
+    "reportUrl": {
+      "description": "Human-facing interactive report for this exact lookup on dechonet.com",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "score": {
+      "description": "0-100 score when the tool scores the target",
+      "type": "number"
+    },
+    "status": {
+      "description": "Overall verdict, e.g. 'good' | 'warning' | 'bad' | 'info' | 'unknown'",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "summary": {
+      "description": "One-paragraph interpretation of the result",
+      "type": "string"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "status",
+    "reportUrl"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}

Changed2 schema fields changedv1.0.3Jun 17, 2026

changedInput schema / properties / host / description

Previous value: -"Hostname to check (e.g., example.com)"New value: +"Hostname to inspect, without scheme (e.g., 'example.com'). The host portion of a pasted URL is also accepted."

changedInput schema / properties / port / description

Previous value: -"Port number (default: 443)"New value: +"TCP port for the TLS handshake. Defaults to 443 (standard HTTPS); set this only for a non-standard HTTPS port such as 8443."

First observedv0.1.0Jun 17, 2026

TDQS

A4.7/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

The description goes beyond the annotations by detailing that it 'completes a TLS handshake but sends no application data,' requires no API key, and is rate-limited. This aligns with the readOnlyHint and destructiveHint, with no contradictions.

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 dense but every clause earns its place: purpose, output details, usage guidance, alternatives, and behavioral notes are all included without redundancy. It is well-structured and easy to parse.

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

Completeness5/5

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

Given the tool's moderate complexity, the description covers input, output format, usage context, alternatives, and operational constraints. An agent has enough context to invoke the tool correctly without needing external details.

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?

The tool description itself does not add parameter-specific guidance beyond what the input schema already provides. The schema descriptions for host and port are thorough, so the baseline of 3 applies because the description adds no extra parameter semantics.

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 opens with a specific action—'Inspect a host's served TLS/SSL certificate and connection'—and enumerates the exact outputs (expiry, issuer, SAN, chain, TLS version, HSTS, and grade). It clearly differentiates from sibling tools by naming http_security and security_scan as alternatives.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

It explicitly states when to use this tool: 'diagnose certificate or HTTPS-handshake problems for one host.' It also gives direct alternative tools for other needs, making the selection criteria unambiguous.

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

Deploy Server