Skip to main content
Glama
code-alchemist01

MCP Cloud Services Server

check_encryption

Verify encryption status of cloud storage, databases, and instances across AWS, Azure, and GCP to ensure data security compliance.

Instructions

Check encryption status of cloud resources

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
providerYesCloud provider
resourceIdYesResource ID to check
resourceTypeYesResource type

Implementation Reference

  • Handler function for the 'check_encryption' tool within the handleSecurityTool switch statement. Returns a static response indicating the resource is unencrypted.
    case 'check_encryption': {
      const resourceId = params.resourceId as string;
      const resourceType = params.resourceType as string;
    
      return {
        provider,
        resourceId,
        resourceType,
        encrypted: false,
        encryptionType: 'none',
        recommendation: 'Enable encryption for this resource',
      };
    }
  • Input schema definition for the 'check_encryption' tool, specifying parameters like provider, resourceId, and resourceType.
    inputSchema: {
      type: 'object',
      properties: {
        provider: {
          type: 'string',
          enum: ['aws', 'azure', 'gcp'],
          description: 'Cloud provider',
        },
        resourceId: {
          type: 'string',
          description: 'Resource ID to check',
        },
        resourceType: {
          type: 'string',
          enum: ['storage', 'database', 'instance'],
          description: 'Resource type',
        },
      },
      required: ['provider', 'resourceId', 'resourceType'],
    },
  • Registration of the 'check_encryption' tool in the securityTools array, including name, description, and schema.
    {
      name: 'check_encryption',
      description: 'Check encryption status of cloud resources',
      inputSchema: {
        type: 'object',
        properties: {
          provider: {
            type: 'string',
            enum: ['aws', 'azure', 'gcp'],
            description: 'Cloud provider',
          },
          resourceId: {
            type: 'string',
            description: 'Resource ID to check',
          },
          resourceType: {
            type: 'string',
            enum: ['storage', 'database', 'instance'],
            description: 'Resource type',
          },
        },
        required: ['provider', 'resourceId', 'resourceType'],
      },
    },
  • src/server.ts:76-77 (registration)
    Registration and dispatching logic in the main server handler that routes calls to security tools, including 'check_encryption', to handleSecurityTool.
    } else if (securityTools.some((t) => t.name === name)) {
      result = await handleSecurityTool(name, args || {});
  • src/server.ts:26-26 (registration)
    Inclusion of securityTools (containing 'check_encryption') into the allTools array used for listing available tools.
    ...securityTools,
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. While 'check' implies a read-only operation, it doesn't specify whether this requires specific permissions, what the output format looks like, whether it's a synchronous or asynchronous operation, or if there are rate limits. For a security-related tool with zero annotation coverage, this is insufficient.

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?

The description is extremely concise at just 6 words, front-loading the core purpose without any wasted words. Every word earns its place by clearly communicating what the tool does.

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

Completeness2/5

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

Given that this is a security-related tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is inadequate. It doesn't explain what the check returns (e.g., encryption status details, compliance findings, recommendations), doesn't mention authentication requirements, and provides no context about the operation's scope or limitations.

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?

The schema description coverage is 100%, with all parameters well-documented in the schema itself. The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond what's already in the schema. According to scoring rules, when schema_description_coverage is high (>80%), the baseline is 3 even with no param info in the description.

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 clearly states the tool's purpose as checking encryption status of cloud resources, which is a specific verb+resource combination. However, it doesn't distinguish this tool from sibling tools like 'check_compliance' or 'scan_security_issues' that might also involve security assessments, leaving some ambiguity about its unique role.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. With sibling tools like 'check_compliance' and 'scan_security_issues' that might overlap in security checking functionality, there's no indication of when this specific encryption check is appropriate versus broader security scans.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/code-alchemist01/Cloud-mcp_server'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server