Post-Quantum Cryptography MCP Server

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

pqc_security_analysis

Maps NIST security levels to classical and quantum equivalents, providing an educational estimate of an algorithm's security properties for post-quantum comparisons.

Instructions

Educational estimate of security properties: maps NIST levels to classical/quantum equivalents. This is a static lookup, not a formal per-algorithm analysis.

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": {
      "algorithm": "<algorithm>"
    },
    "name": "pqc_security_analysis"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`algorithm`	Yes	Algorithm to analyze

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.10.0Nov 4, 2026

TDQS

B3.4/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden, and it does disclose two useful traits: the result is a static lookup (deterministic, no computation) and it is an educational estimate, not rigorous analysis. It does not describe the shape of the returned mapping or warn about what the estimate should not be used for in a production decision.

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?

Two short sentences, front-loaded with the capability and followed immediately by the scope caveat. Nothing is wasted, though it could have used the saved space to name the differentiating sibling.

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?

A one-parameter tool with no output schema and no annotations needs the description to cover both the return shape and safety profile. It handles the caveat well but leaves the agent guessing what the mapping output actually contains and how to interpret confidence in the estimate.

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 a single required 'algorithm' string, so the baseline is 3. The description adds a little framing by implying the parameter drives a NIST-level mapping, but it gives no guidance on accepted algorithm name formats or examples.

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 states a specific action and output ('maps NIST levels to classical/quantum equivalents') and explicitly scopes itself as a static lookup rather than a formal per-algorithm analysis. That qualifier is what separates it from a heavier sibling like pqc_algorithm_info, though it never names that sibling outright.

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?

Usage is only implied: the phrase 'Educational estimate' and 'not a formal per-algorithm analysis' hints at when this is appropriate (rough guidance rather than rigorous evaluation). No sibling alternative such as pqc_algorithm_info or pqc_compare is named, and there are no prerequisites or exclusions spelled out.

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