Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
ncloud-mcp-server

ncloud-mcp-server

by sjk4425
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

ncloud_pca_get_ca_chain

Read-only

Retrieve the PEM certificate chain for a Private CA to establish trust and enable secure client-server communication.

Instructions

Get the certificate chain (PEM) of a Private CA.

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>"
    },
    "name": "ncloud_pca_get_ca_chain"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
caTagYesCA tag value

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.10.1

TDQS

A3.6/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

The annotation readOnlyHint=true already establishes the safe read-only nature. The description adds the output format (PEM) and resource type (Private CA) beyond the annotation, but does not describe error cases, return structure, or other behavioral traits. Given the annotation covers the main safety aspect, this is adequate but not rich.

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?

One sentence, nine words, front-loaded and direct. No unnecessary words or repetition.

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

Completeness4/5

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

The tool is simple (one parameter, read-only, no output schema). The description conveys the purpose and the input's reference, which is sufficient for a basic retrieval operation. It could benefit from noting that the chain is for a Private CA only, but the name and description already convey that. Minor gaps prevent a 5.

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%, and the parameter caTag is documented as 'CA tag value'. The description clarifies that the tag refers to the Private CA whose chain is requested, adding slight context, but does not elaborate beyond the schema. Baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 identifies the action ('Get'), the resource ('certificate chain (PEM) of a Private CA'), and is distinct from sibling PCA tools like get_ca and get_ca_crl. It is specific and unambiguous.

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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, no prerequisites, and no exclusions. It simply states what it does, leaving the agent to infer usage from the name.

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