XenozMCP

by Xenoz-GitHub

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

JavaScript

Local

vault_set

Encrypt and store sensitive data like API keys and secrets using AES-256-GCM for secure retrieval via key name.

Instructions

Securely store an encrypted value (AES-256-GCM). Use for API keys and secrets.

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": {
      "name": "<name>",
      "value": "<value>"
    },
    "name": "vault_set"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`name`	Yes	Key name
`value`	Yes	Value to encrypt and store

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Jul 11, 2026

TDQS

A3.8/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description discloses encryption algorithm (AES-256-GCM) and implies secure storage. It lacks details on idempotency, overwrite behavior, or size limits, but the core behavioral trait (encryption) is covered.

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?

The description is a single sentence that front-loads the action and key details. It is concise but lacks structure (e.g., bullet points or explicit parameter listing).

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a store operation with no output schema, the description covers the essential purpose but omits return value or error handling information. Given the simplicity, it is adequate 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 coverage is 100% with param descriptions that already mention encryption. The tool description adds the algorithm name, providing marginal extra meaning. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 clearly states it stores an encrypted value using AES-256-GCM, distinguishing it from sibling tools like vault_get (retrieval) and vault_list (listing). The use case for API keys and secrets is specific.

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?

The description suggests using this tool for API keys and secrets, providing clear context. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternative tools like cloud_set_data_store_entry.

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