Skip to main content
Glama
sjk4425

ncloud-mcp-server

by sjk4425
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

ncloud_edge_provision_certificate

Provision certificates from Certificate Manager into a new Global Edge certificate slot for custom domains. Specify region, TLS version, and cipher profile.

Instructions

Provision certificates from Certificate Manager into a new Global Edge certificate slot for custom domains

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
tlsVersionYesSupported TLS versions (TLS_MIN_VERSION_1_2 recommended)
cipherProfileYesCipher profile (STRICT not allowed with TLS_ALL_VERSIONS)
serviceRegionYesService region: KR_JP (one KR/JP certificate) or KR_JP_GLOBAL (one KR/JP + one global certificate)
cmCertificateIdsYesCertificate Manager certificate numbers

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed8 schema fields changedv2.0.1
    • removedInput schema / properties / certificateNo
      Removed value: -{
-  "description": "Certificate number from Certificate Manager to provision",
-  "type": "number"
-}
    • addedInput schema / properties / cipherProfile
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Cipher profile (STRICT not allowed with TLS_ALL_VERSIONS)",
+  "enum": [
+    "DEFAULT",
+    "GENERAL",
+    "STRICT"
+  ],
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • addedInput schema / properties / cmCertificateIds
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Certificate Manager certificate numbers",
+  "items": {
+    "type": "number"
+  },
+  "minItems": 1,
+  "type": "array"
+}
    • removedInput schema / properties / serviceRegion / default
      Removed value: -"KR_JP"
    • changedInput schema / properties / serviceRegion / description
      Previous value: -"Certificate application scope: KR_JP (Korea/Japan) or GLOBAL"New value: +"Service region: KR_JP (one KR/JP certificate) or KR_JP_GLOBAL (one KR/JP + one global certificate)"
    • changedInput schema / properties / serviceRegion / enum
      Previous value: -[
-  "KR_JP",
-  "GLOBAL"
-]New value: +[
+  "KR_JP",
+  "KR_JP_GLOBAL"
+]
    • addedInput schema / properties / tlsVersion
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Supported TLS versions (TLS_MIN_VERSION_1_2 recommended)",
+  "enum": [
+    "TLS_ALL_VERSIONS",
+    "TLS_MIN_VERSION_1_2"
+  ],
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • changedInput schema / required
      Previous value: -[
-  "certificateNo"
-]New value: +[
+  "serviceRegion",
+  "cmCertificateIds",
+  "tlsVersion",
+  "cipherProfile"
+]
  2. First observedv1.10.1

TDQS

C2.9/5.0
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 reveals that a new slot is created, but says nothing about side effects, idempotency, permission requirements, or what happens if a slot already exists – significant gaps for a provisioning/mutation operation.

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 efficient sentence with the key action and destination front-loaded. No wasted words, though it is arguably under-specified rather than optimally concise.

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?

Parameters are well covered by the schema and there is no output schema to explain, but for a provisioning tool with no annotations the description lacks behavioral detail (preconditions, side effects, post-state), leaving a real gap relative to the tool's complexity.

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 enum values fully documented, so the schema already explains the parameters. The description only adds the general context ('from Certificate Manager', 'for custom domains') without parameter-specific detail, warranting the baseline 3.

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?

States a specific verb (Provision) and resource (certificates from Certificate Manager into a new Global Edge certificate slot for custom domains). It distinguishes the object and scope clearly, though it doesn't explicitly name the sibling alternatives like ncloud_edge_add_certificate_to_slot or ncloud_cm2_request_global_edge_certificate.

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 on when to use this versus related siblings such as ncloud_edge_add_certificate_to_slot (adding to an existing slot) or ncloud_edge_update_certificate_tls. The 'new slot' phrasing implies a precondition but never states it or the alternatives.

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