Post-Quantum Cryptography MCP Server

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

pqc_hash

Compute quantum-safe hash digests using SHA3-256, SHA3-512, SHAKE128, or SHAKE256 to verify message integrity and support post-quantum cryptographic workflows.

Instructions

Compute a quantum-safe hash digest (SHA3-256, SHA3-512, SHAKE128, SHAKE256)

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": {
      "message": "<message>"
    },
    "name": "pqc_hash"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`message`	Yes	Message to hash
`algorithm`	No		SHA3-256

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.10.0Nov 4, 2026

TDQS

C2.9/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and it discloses almost nothing behavioral: it never says the digest is deterministic, non-destructive, or that no key material is needed. Critically, it omits that SHAKE128/SHAKE256 are extendable-output functions requiring an output length, and it never states the return encoding (hex vs. raw bytes).

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?

One short sentence with the operation front-loaded and the algorithm set parenthesized — no wasted wording. It is arguably over-terse for a tool with unresolved output-format questions, but structurally it is clean and easy to scan.

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?

There is no output schema, so the description is the only place to learn what comes back, and it never says (hex string? base64? length?). Combined with the undocumented SHAKE output-length behavior and the missing default, the definition leaves real gaps for a two-parameter crypto primitive.

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 only 50% — 'message' is documented in the schema while 'algorithm' is not, though the description's parenthetical enumerates the algorithm choices, partially compensating. It still omits the stated default (SHA3-256) and any guidance on choosing between the four, or on output-length semantics for SHAKE.

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 gives a specific verb ('Compute') and resource ('quantum-safe hash digest') and names the four supported algorithms, which clearly identifies the operation. It does not explicitly distinguish itself from near-neighbors like pqc_fingerprint or pqc_compare, but the name-plus-verb pairing is unambiguous enough to route correctly.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this versus siblings such as pqc_fingerprint (which likely hashes keys/certificates) or pqc_compare. No preconditions, no exclusions, no stated alternatives — the agent must infer usage purely from the tool name.

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