An MCP server that handles encrypted email sending with post-quantum cryptography (CRYSTALS-Kyber, Falcon-512, SPHINCS+) and natural language processing for email request parsing
Single tool 'send_email' has a basic schema with typed parameters and descriptions, but critical gaps undermine production readiness. The tool description (89 chars) is below the 194-char baseline and lacks WHEN/WHY guidance. Parameter descriptions are present but generic ('The recipient email address' vs actionable format/validation rules). No output schema documented. No error handling guidance, LLM cannot distinguish retryable failures from fatal ones. No idempotency or confirmation pattern for this destructive operation. The server itself is not MCP-compliant (custom TCP protocol, not MCP).
Send an email using SMTP with encrypted payload containing recipient, subject, and body
Tool description lacks WHEN/WHY context and is below baseline length (89 vs 194 chars). Does not explain when to use this tool vs alternatives, prerequisites, or consequences.
No output schema documented. LLM cannot predict response structure, fields, or error format. Breaks downstream tool chaining and error recovery.
No error handling guidance. Responses only indicate success/failure with generic messages. LLM cannot distinguish retryable network errors from invalid email addresses or auth failures.
Destructive operation (send_email) lacks confirmation or dry-run pattern. Agents cannot preview or confirm before executing irreversible action.
| Scored | Grade | Overall | Spec posture | Rubric |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-09-23 | F | 43 | 2026-07-28+ | v2 |
Parameter descriptions are generic and lack format/validation rules. 'The recipient email address' does not specify format, validation, or what happens if invalid. Should state: 'Valid email address (RFC 5322 format). If invalid, tool returns error with suggestion.'