ncloud-gov-mcp-server

ncloud_pca_activate_sub_ca

Activate a Sub CA by providing its tag, signed certificate, and signer chain. Enables the certificate authority for issuing certificates.

Instructions

Activate a Sub CA using a signed certificate and CA chain (direct signing method).

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": {
      "caTag": "<caTag>",
      "certPem": "<certPem>",
      "caChainPem": "<caChainPem>"
    },
    "name": "ncloud_pca_activate_sub_ca"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`caTag`	Yes	CA tag value of the Sub CA to activate
`certPem`	Yes	Signed CA certificate in PEM format
`caChainPem`	Yes	Signer certificate chain in PEM format

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.1Aug 2, 2026

TDQS

B3.4/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

Annotations are empty, so the description carries the full burden. It only states 'Activate a Sub CA' without disclosing side effects, prerequisites (e.g., CA state), permission requirements, or reversibility. This is insufficient for a state-changing operation.

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, focused sentence that immediately states the action and key inputs. No unnecessary words or repetition.

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?

Despite complete schema coverage and no output schema, the description provides minimal context. It omits the activation workflow, prerequisite CA state, potential outcomes, or error conditions. For a CA activation operation, an agent needs more to fully understand the tool's role.

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 detailed descriptions for caTag, certPem, and caChainPem. The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond echoing 'signed certificate and CA chain', so it meets the baseline but doesn't enhance understanding.

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 clearly states the action ('Activate'), the target resource ('Sub CA'), and the method ('using a signed certificate and CA chain (direct signing method)'). It distinguishes from sibling tools like ncloud_pca_sign_sub_csr by specifying the activation step and the direct signing method.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

The description implies when to use this tool (when you have a signed certificate and CA chain) but does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusion conditions. The phrase 'direct signing method' hints at possible alternatives but lacks concrete guidance.

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

Deploy Server