Should my agent depend on the MCP server io.github.bowenerchen/cipherhub?

Verdict: allow — stale-mid-slow-solo — safe to depend on As of 2026-08-15T11:28:18Z: a dated observation with receipts, not a warranty.

CipherHUB Cryptography Toolkit

io.github.bowenerchen/cipherhub

Production-grade cryptography toolkit with 31 MCP tools for classical, PQC, and KMS workflows.

— the operator's own registry description reported

Publisher io.github.bowenerchen · first seen 2026-08-12 · endpoint https://tools.cipherhub.cloud/cipherhub/mcp

allow

verdict

stale-mid-slow-solo

cluster

ok_tools

answers

tools served

Dependency rating derived

allow — stale-mid-slow-solo — safe to depend on

Cluster stale-mid-slow-solo · distinctiveness 0.772 (unusual). Every figure is a percentile or class within the 11,094-server census — see the whole spectrum.

Reach — can an agent get to it?

answersalive_tools

latency1196 ms

vs populationslow

protocolbehind

authopen

Use — can it use it?

tools32

vs populationmid

capabilities4

harnessA

Trust — can it rely on it?

identitysolo

servers on its host1

verifiabilityunassessed

duplicate inventoryno

drift events0

answers trueno primary

🔏 Signed receipt rr_f11b867e090cb4ecd6cacf87 · ed25519 · key rs-rcpt-2026-08 — this rating is tamper-evident; an agent gets the full signature from check_server and can verify it against the published key.

Tools last seen

block_cipher data_padding ecc_key_exchange ecc_key_sign ecc_key_verify generate_ecc generate_random_data generate_rsa generate_sm2 hash_sum hello hmac_sum hybrid_kex ml_dsa_compute_mu ml_dsa_keygen ml_dsa_sign ml_dsa_verify ml_kem_decap ml_kem_encap ml_kem_keygen rsa_decryption rsa_encryption rsa_sign rsa_verify sm2_decryption sm2_encryption sm2_private_key_structure_parse sm2_public_key_to_hex sm2_sign sm2_verify stream_cipher zuc_cipher

Harness readiness observed

Can an agent's harness pick this tool and call it correctly? Graded on the three things an agent reads — name, description, typed parameters. Band A — an agent can pick and call these reliably.

legibility check	tools passing	ok
name is clear & specific	32/32	✓
has a description	32/32	✓
description is substantive	32/32	✓
parameters are typed	32/32	✓
parameters are described	31/32	31/32

32 of 32 tools graded · 32 with a captured input schema. RS-008, Tier-1 — no domain knowledge, applies to any tool. “Alive” is not the same as “usable”.

Truth checks observed

Not in the Tier-2 trade lane, or not yet checked. Tier-2 re-derives a server's answers against published primary sources — see truth checks.

Protocol conformance observed

2025-03-26

protocol version

—

session model

1.9.4

server version cipherhub-mcp

Capabilities: experimental prompts resources tools

Drift

No confirmed drift on record. Baseline set 2026-08-14; changes appear here after human review.

History observed

Every probe we made, oldest → newest (2 shown, 2026-08-12 → 2026-08-14). Green answered · amber answered-but-walled · red no useful answer. A gap in our cadence is a gap in coverage, not evidence about the server.

changelog (1 events)

date	type	what changed
2026-08-12	outcome	first probe: ok_tools

raw probe records

probed (UTC)	outcome	http	ms	protocol
2026-08-14T19:59:25Z	ok_tools	200	1196	2025-03-26
2026-08-12T05:34:37Z	ok_tools	200	1470	2025-03-26

Watch or embed this verdict

Operators: put the live verdict in your README — it updates with every census, links back here, and is a dated observation, never a warranty:

[![Robin Saige verdict](https://robinsaige.com/badge/io.github.bowenerchen/cipherhub.svg)](https://robinsaige.com/s/io.github.bowenerchen/cipherhub)

Depend on it? Subscribe to its change feed — outcome changes and confirmed drift, no account needed. Building on it? The full dossier as JSON — verdict, rating, truth checks, history — stable enough to gate CI on.

← overview