Check Point Management MCP Server
Server Configuration
Describes the environment variables required to run the server.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Instructions
Guidance the server publishes about itself, which clients place ahead of the tool catalog so the model reads it before choosing anything.
This server publishes no instructions, or was last inspected before Glama recorded them.
Capabilities
Features and capabilities supported by this server
Protocol revision2025-11-25
| Capability | Details |
|---|---|
| tools | {
"listChanged": true
} |
| logging | {} |
| prompts | {
"listChanged": false
} |
| resources | {
"subscribe": false,
"listChanged": false
} |
| extensions | {
"io.modelcontextprotocol/ui": {}
} |
| experimental | {} |
Tools
Functions exposed to the LLM to take actions
| Name | Description |
|---|---|
| checkpoint_list_access_rulesA | List access rules in a given layer, optionally filtered by lifecycle status. Mirrors the real Management API |
| checkpoint_add_access_ruleA | Add a new access rule to the current session. The rule is created with status This is typically a human-gated step in a change workflow, reserved for network-policy changes. |
| checkpoint_publish_sessionA | Commit every drafted rule in the current session to the management server. Drafted rules transition to |
| checkpoint_install_policyA | Push published rules on a layer to the named gateways. This is the moment a compensating-control rule actually starts blocking traffic on the wire. The orchestrator pairs this call with the operator's third human-in-loop approval. |
Prompts
Interactive templates invoked by user choice
| Name | Description |
|---|---|
No prompts | |
Resources
Contextual data attached and managed by the client
| Name | Description |
|---|---|
No resources | |
TDQS
Scored across 4 tools
Each tool has a distinct and clearly defined purpose: listing rules, adding a draft rule, publishing the session, and installing the policy. There is no overlap or ambiguity between them.
All tool names follow a consistent `checkpoint_<verb>_<noun>` pattern with clear and descriptive verbs (list, add, publish, install). The naming is uniform and predictable.
Four tools is a reasonable scope for a focused policy management workflow. It covers the essential steps but could potentially include a few more without becoming overwhelming.
The tools cover the core lifecycle of creating, viewing, publishing, and installing access rules, but lack update and delete operations for individual rules. This may force agents to work around missing functionality.