Skip to main content
Glama

CipherHUB Cryptography Toolkit

by io.github.bowenerchen

rsa_decryption

[rsa] RSA 私钥解密。 【参数】

  • rsa_private_key_in_pem：PEM 格式私钥

  • cipher_data_in_hex：密文 Hex（长度 = key_size/8 字节）

  • rsa_padding_mode：必须与加密时一致

  • password：若私钥有密码保护则传入 【输出】plain_data_in_hex、plain_length。

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
passwordNo密码（原始字符串，非编码格式；私钥工具为私钥加密密码，KDF Pbkdf2Sm3 为待拉伸口令）
rsa_padding_modeNoRSA 加密填充模式，可选值：RSAES_PKCS1_V1_5 / RSAES_OAEP_SHA_1 / RSAES_OAEP_SHA_224 / RSAES_OAEP_SHA_256 / RSAES_OAEP_SHA_384 / RSAES_OAEP_SHA_512
cipher_data_in_hexNo密文的十六进制字符串
rsa_private_key_in_pemNoRSA 私钥的 PEM 文本（含 BEGIN/END 头尾的 Base64 编码文本）

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / password / description
      Previous value: -"私钥的加密密码（原始字符串，非编码格式）"New value: +"密码（原始字符串，非编码格式；私钥工具为私钥加密密码，KDF Pbkdf2Sm3 为待拉伸口令）"
  2. Changed5 schema fields changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / cipher_data_in_hex / description
      Added value: +"密文的十六进制字符串"
    • addedInput schema / properties / password / description
      Added value: +"私钥的加密密码（原始字符串，非编码格式）"
    • addedInput schema / properties / rsa_padding_mode / description
      Added value: +"RSA 加密填充模式，可选值：RSAES_PKCS1_V1_5 / RSAES_OAEP_SHA_1 / RSAES_OAEP_SHA_224 / RSAES_OAEP_SHA_256 / RSAES_OAEP_SHA_384 / RSAES_OAEP_SHA_512"
    • addedInput schema / properties / rsa_padding_mode / enum
      Added value: +[
+  "RSAES_PKCS1_V1_5",
+  "RSAES_OAEP_SHA_1",
+  "RSAES_OAEP_SHA_224",
+  "RSAES_OAEP_SHA_256",
+  "RSAES_OAEP_SHA_384",
+  "RSAES_OAEP_SHA_512"
+]
    • addedInput schema / properties / rsa_private_key_in_pem / description
      Added value: +"RSA 私钥的 PEM 文本（含 BEGIN/END 头尾的 Base64 编码文本）"
  3. First observed

TDQS

A3.9/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden and does well by specifying cipher length requirements ('长度 = key_size/8 字节'), the need for padding-mode consistency, conditional password use, and the output fields ('plain_data_in_hex、plain_length'). It does not discuss failure modes, but the disclosed operational constraints are meaningful.

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 compact, front-loaded with the core purpose, and uses a clear structured parameter/output layout. Every line adds either a parameter meaning or an operational constraint, with no redundant filler.

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

Completeness4/5

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

Given there is no output schema, the description correctly specifies the return values (plain_data_in_hex, plain_length). It also clarifies key constraints such as cipher length and padding consistency. A minor gap is that it does not explicitly mark which parameters are mandatory despite the schema listing all 4 as optional, but the purpose and parameter notes largely compensate.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds value beyond the schema by explaining that rsa_padding_mode must match encryption, that password is only needed for protected private keys, and that cipher_data_in_hex length must equal key_size/8 bytes.

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 opens with 'RSA 私钥解密', a specific verb and resource that clearly identifies this as a private-key decryption tool. It does not explicitly differentiate itself from siblings like rsa_encryption, rsa_sign, or rsa_verify, but the operation is clear enough to avoid confusion.

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?

The description implies usage: use this when RSA private-key decryption is needed, and it adds important operational guidance such as 'rsa_padding_mode 必须与加密时一致' and '若私钥有密码保护则传入'. However, it does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use the tool.

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

All CipherHUB Cryptography Toolkit toolsInspect
Try in Browser
RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A3.9/5.0
Disambiguation4/5

Most tools target a distinct algorithm+operation pair (e.g., rsa_sign vs sm2_sign vs ml_dsa_sign), and descriptions are detailed. However, block_cipher and stream_cipher both perform symmetric encryption, and ecc_key_exchange and hybrid_kex overlap as key exchange, requiring careful reading to distinguish.

Naming Consistency3/5

Naming is inconsistent across algorithm families: key generation mixes generate_ecc/generate_rsa with ml_dsa_keygen/ml_kem_keygen, and encryption mixes rsa_encryption/sm2_encryption with block_cipher/stream_cipher. Within each family (e.g., rsa_sign/rsa_verify, ml_dsa_sign/ml_dsa_verify), names are predictable, but the overall pattern is not uniform.

Tool Count2/5

32 tools is far above the typical 3-15 range for a well-scoped server. While every tool has a distinct function, the large surface makes the set heavy and harder to navigate, especially with multiple algorithm families and niche utilities.

Completeness5/5

The toolkit gives comprehensive coverage: key generation, encryption/decryption, signing/verification for RSA, ECC, SM2, ML-DSA, ML-KEM, plus symmetric ciphers, hashing, and key exchange. Full workflows are supported with no dead ends, and even helper tools for debugging are included.

Resources