Here is an attempt of mine this week:

diff --git a/g10/call-agent.c b/g10/call-agent.c
index 5e13a3e52..8949fad17 100644
--- a/g10/call-agent.c
+++ b/g10/call-agent.c
@@ -3290,13 +3290,14 @@ confirm_status_cb (void *opaque, const char *line)
    message.  If FORCE is true the agent is advised not to ask for
    confirmation. */
 gpg_error_t
-agent_delete_key (ctrl_t ctrl, const char *hexkeygrip, const char *desc,
+agent_delete_key (ctrl_t ctrl, const char *keygrip, const char *desc,
                   int force)
 {
   gpg_error_t err;
   char line[ASSUAN_LINELENGTH];
   struct default_inq_parm_s dfltparm;
   struct confirm_parm_s confirm_parm;
+  const char *keygrip2 = NULL;

Sorry for the ambiguity. The request was only about mentioning (bpX) for the first two choices, not to add more combinations.

Physical experiment feature support should better not be widely used.

Although it is technicall possible to use all combinations, we should limit in the menu them to those as listed above. Too many algorithms pose an interop problem. Thus we provide brainpool because it is required in Germany and the two IETF curves for the general internet (for those who are playing mitigation against against physical experiments).

Note: In vsd it must be restricted to the bp algorithms then

it does not make sense to have a workboard item for this parent ticket.

Tested with Gpg4win-5.0.0-beta479

That is a feature not a bug. Make also sense if your threat model is store-trafic-no-decrypt-later. If you can get the key you will also be abale to get the cleartext. Any nobody can remember a passphrase on par with the claimed Kyber security level.