Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
grid402-mcp

grid402-mcp

by oliveiratc
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Remote

grid402_ssl

Inspect and validate a host's TLS/SSL certificate on port 443 to retrieve issuer, validity, SANs, and remaining days before expiry.

Instructions

Inspeciona e valida o certificado TLS/SSL na porta 443 de um host (emissor, validade, SANs e contagem de dias restantes até expirar).

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "host": "<host>"
    },
    "name": "grid402_ssl"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
hostYesHostname ou domínio alvo para inspeção TLS (ex: "base.org", "google.com").
payment_tx_hashNoHash opcional de transação na Base Mainnet com 0.0005 USDC.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

B3.2/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations supplied, the description carries the full burden, and it does disclose the returned fields (issuer, validity, SANs, days remaining) plus the fixed port 443 scope. However, it omits the paid-invocation behavior entirely — no mention of cost, the Base Mainnet transaction, or what happens if payment_tx_hash is absent — which is a material behavioral gap for a metered tool.

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?

A single well-formed sentence with the target resource front-loaded and the return fields compactly parenthesized; no filler. It could have used a second short clause for the payment precondition without becoming verbose.

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 two-parameter tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description does cover what is returned, which is helpful. It is still incomplete on the commercial/authorization side: an agent cannot learn from the description that a USDC payment hash may be needed, which is essential for correct invocation.

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 schema already documents both 'host' and 'payment_tx_hash' fully; the description adds no meaning beyond that baseline. The description's mention of host/port overlaps with the schema rather than extending it.

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 names a specific verb and resource ('Inspeciona e valida o certificado TLS/SSL na porta 443 de um host') and enumerates the fields it reports (issuer, validity, SANs, days to expiry). This clearly separates it from siblings like grid402_dns or grid402_asn, though it never explicitly names an alternative tool.

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?

There is no explicit guidance on when to choose this over grid402_dns, grid402_verify or the other siblings, nor any mention of prerequisites. Most critically, the description says nothing about the payment_tx_hash requirement (0.0005 USDC on Base Mainnet), which is exactly the kind of precondition an agent must know before calling.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools