Click on "Deploy Server".
Wait a few minutes for the server to deploy. Once ready, it will show a "Started" state.
In the chat, type @ followed by the MCP server name and your instructions, e.g., "@ssl-expiry-checker-mcp check SSL expiry for github.com"
That's it! The server will respond to your query, and you can continue using it as needed.
Here is a step-by-step guide with screenshots.
一个基于 MCP (Model Context Protocol) 的 SSL 证书到期检查工具，可以快速检查任何网站的 SSL 证书有效期。
🔍 检查任意域名的 SSL 证书到期时间
⏰ 计算证书剩余有效天数
🚨 智能状态提示（已过期/即将过期/有效）
🌐 支持多种 URL 格式输入
Related MCP server: mcp-certificate-monitor
确保已安装 Python 3.11 或更高版本，然后使用 uv 安装依赖：
uv syncuv run main.py编辑 Claude Desktop 配置文件：
macOS: ~/Library/Application Support/Claude/claude_desktop_config.json
Windows: %APPDATA%\Claude\claude_desktop_config.json
添加以下配置：
{
"mcpServers": {
"ssl-checker": {
"command": "uv",
"args": [
"--directory",
"/path/to/ssl-expiry-checker-mcp",
"run",
"main.py"
]
}
}
}检查给定网址的 SSL 证书有效期。
参数:
url (string): 要检查的网址，支持以下格式：
example.com
https://example.com
www.example.com
返回: 包含证书到期信息的详细报告
**SSL 证书检查结果**
目标网址: https://example.com
域名: example.com
到期时间: 2026-12-31 23:59:59 UTC
剩余天数: 305 天
状态: ✅ 证书有效✅ 证书有效: 剩余天数 ≥ 7 天
⚠️ 证书即将过期: 剩余天数 < 7 天
⏳ 证书将在今天过期: 剩余天数 = 0 天
🚨 证书已过期: 剩余天数 < 0 天
Python 3.11+
FastMCP
标准库: ssl, socket, urllib
MIT
检查给定网址的 SSL 证书有效期。
Args:
url (str): 要检查的网址 (例如: example.com 或 https://example.com)
Returns:
str: 包含证书到期信息或错误详情。
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| url | Yes |
| Name | Required | Description |
|---|---|---|
| result | Yes |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It states it returns a string but omits details like network dependency, caching, error handling, or performance implications.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is concise, with the purpose front-loaded and well-structured using Args/Returns. It is appropriately sized for a simple tool.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Given the single parameter and presence of an output schema, the description is adequate but lacks details about error cases, timeout behavior, or the format of the returned string. More context would improve completeness.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
The input schema has no description for the parameter, but the description's Args section adds meaning by explaining what the URL should look like with examples. This significantly compensates for the 0% schema coverage.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description clearly states the action: checking SSL certificate validity of a given URL. It uses a specific verb and resource, making the purpose unmistakable.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The description gives an example of acceptable URL formats but does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives or any context about prerequisites.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Recent tool additions, removals, and schema changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0ssl_expiry_checkerScored across 1 tool
Only one tool exists, so there is no possibility of confusion between tools. The tool's purpose is clearly defined and distinct.
With a single tool, naming is inherently consistent. The name 'ssl_expiry_checker' is descriptive and follows a clear pattern.
The server has only one tool, which is minimal for its domain. While it serves a focused purpose, it falls short of the typical 3-15 tool range for a well-scoped server.
The single tool covers the core functionality of checking SSL certificate expiry for a given URL. However, it lacks additional tools for batch checks, certificate details, or alerting, which would enhance completeness.
SSL/TLS scanning, free Let's Encrypt issuance, and certificate-expiry monitoring.
Monitors TLS/SSL certificate expiry, DNS resolution, and TCP port status for AI agents.
DNS lookups, health reports, SSL certs, security scans, GEO scoring, uptime checks
Free anonymous website, DNS, email and TLS checks, plus monitor read and opt-in write access.
