qeaas-mcp

random_bytes

Canonical developer endpoint: DRBG-derived bytes in hex or base64 with a signed provenance receipt. Requires X-API-Key; 32..4096 bytes; per-key rate limit + daily quota.

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": {
      "size": "<size>"
    },
    "name": "random_bytes"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`size`	Yes
`format`	No		hex

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedJul 28, 2026

TDQS

A4.2/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description fully discloses behavior: it generates cryptographic bytes (DRBG-derived), outputs hex or base64, includes a signed provenance receipt, and imposes key-based rate limits and quotas. No side effects mentioned, but as a read-like operation this is acceptable.

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?

Single sentence packed with relevant information: endpoint type, cryptographic source, output formats, authentication, size constraints, and rate limits. No unnecessary words; every part earns its place.

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?

Given the tool has only 2 parameters and no output schema, the description covers the core: what it does, auth, constraints, and output format. It does not elaborate on the provenance receipt format, but the description is sufficient for an agent to invoke correctly.

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 coverage is 0%, so description must compensate. It mentions size range (32..4096 bytes) and possible formats (hex or base64), but does not explain default value for format or explicitly state that size is required. Adds meaning but lacks full precision.

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 specifies the verb 'generates' implicitly through 'Canonical developer endpoint' and explicitly states the resource: 'DRBG-derived bytes in hex or base64 with a signed provenance receipt.' It clearly distinguishes from siblings like 'random' and 'dice' by mentioning DRBG and provenance.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

Explicitly states requirements: 'Requires X-API-Key; 32..4096 bytes; per-key rate limit + daily quota.' Provides clear context for when to use (cryptographic randomness) but stops short of naming alternatives or stating when not to use.

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

All qeaas-mcp tools Inspect

Try in Browser

One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.