Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

Privi Quantum

by io.github.canoydario847-cloud
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Privi Vault: seal data (harvest-now-decrypt-later protection)

vault_seal

Re-wrap long-lived sensitive data under hybrid post-quantum encryption (X25519 + ML-KEM, AES-256-GCM) so data recorded today can't be decrypted by a future quantum computer. Returns the envelope and a signed protection receipt anchored on chain. Plaintext is not stored. Paid per call via x402 when payments are on (see quantum_pricing).

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": {
      "public_key": "<public_key>"
    },
    "name": "vault_seal"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
textNoText to protect
labelNoWhat this is, e.g. 'supplier contract 2026' (kept in the envelope and receipt)
public_keyYesRecipient public key from vault_keygen
data_base64NoOr bytes to protect, base64 (up to 5 MB)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Added

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Beyond the annotations, the description discloses the return shape (envelope plus a signed, chain-anchored protection receipt), a key storage guarantee (plaintext is not stored), and a billing model (per-call x402 payment, conditional on payments being on). That is meaningful context the annotations do not carry, though failure modes and repeat-call behavior are unstated.

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?

Four tight sentences with zero filler: purpose and threat first, then return value, then storage guarantee, then payment note. Each sentence carries distinct information and the most decision-relevant content is front-loaded.

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?

With no output schema, the description usefully characterizes the return (envelope plus receipt), and the nested public_key is anchored to its producer tool. Gaps remain around the text-vs-data_base64 choice and error/retry behavior, but for a four-parameter sealing tool it covers what an agent needs to invoke it 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 description coverage is 100%, so all four parameters including the nested public_key and the base64 size cap are already documented in structured form. The description adds no format, encoding, or precedence guidance (e.g. text vs data_base64) beyond the schema, so the baseline of 3 applies.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description pairs a specific verb (re-wrap/seal) with a specific resource (long-lived sensitive data) and names the exact cryptographic construction (X25519 + ML-KEM, AES-256-GCM) and the threat it addresses (harvest-now-decrypt-later). It never names the adjacent vault tools (vault_keygen for the key, vault_open for the inverse operation), so sibling differentiation is left to inference rather than stated.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

The phrase 'long-lived sensitive data ... recorded today' implies the usage condition, and '(see quantum_pricing)' routes the agent for cost questions. However, there is no explicit when-not-to-use, no statement that a key from vault_keygen must be obtained first (that lives only in the schema), and no mention of vault_open as the counterpart.

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

All Privi Quantum toolsInspect
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