Rosetta Quantum — PQC exposure

medir_exposicion_pqc

Mide EN VIVO, desde afuera, la exposición post-cuántica pública de un dominio: si su sitio negocia el intercambio híbrido X25519MLKEM768, qué certificado presenta, sus servidores de correo y su security.txt. Envía saludos TLS reales (no es lectura de un archivo). Con sector, devuelve además el índice QEX (el mismo cálculo que la página /es/q-ready/medicion) y su comparación con el sector. El cifrado del correo llega aparte: la respuesta trae un id para ver_cifrado_correo. null significa «no medido», nunca «no protegido». Límite: pocas mediciones por minuto.

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": {
      "dominio": "<dominio>"
    },
    "name": "medir_exposicion_pqc"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`agente`	No	opcional: quién mide (nombre y versión del agente)
`sector`	No	sector para el QEX y la comparación: banca, educacion, energia, fintech, gobierno, mineria, prevision, retail, salud_clinica, salud_isapre, seguros, telecom
`dominio`	Yes	dominio público, p.ej. ejemplo.cl

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedNov 13, 2026

TDQS

A4.1/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does well: it states that real TLS handshakes are sent (not a file read), that the QEX uses the same calculation as /es/q-ready/medicion, that results are rate-limited, and that null means 'not measured' rather than 'not protected'. It does not cover permissions, failure modes, or latency, which keeps it below a 5 for a network-probing tool.

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?

Information is front-loaded: what is measured comes first, then the optional sector behavior, then the downstream ver_cifrado_correo handoff and the null/rate-limit caveats. Dense but every clause carries signal; only the repeated QEX explanation slightly overlaps with the schema.

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?

No output schema and no annotations, so the description must supply both behavior and result semantics; it covers the important parts (what is probed, the follow-up id, QEX availability, null interpretation, rate limit). It leaves the full shape of the response (certificate fields, mail server list) undescribed, which is acceptable but not complete.

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%, so the baseline is 3 and the schema already explains all three parameters including the enumerated sector list. The description only reinforces `sector` (QEX plus sector comparison) and `dominio` (public domain), adding little meaning the schema does not already carry.

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?

Opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Mide EN VIVO, desde afuera, la exposición post-cuántica pública de un dominio', then enumerates exactly what is checked (X25519MLKEM768 negotiation, certificate, mail servers, security.txt). It also explicitly distinguishes itself from ver_cifrado_correo by saying mail encryption is returned separately, so an agent can tell the two apart without opening either schema.

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?

Gives concrete conditions: use `sector` to also get the QEX index and sector comparison, and follow up with ver_cifrado_correo for mail encryption using the returned id. Adds an operational constraint ('pocas mediciones por minuto'). It stops short of stating when NOT to use the tool or what to do if the domain is unknown, so it is clear but not fully exhaustive.

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

All Rosetta Quantum — PQC exposure 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.

Resources

Need Help?