ExitValue.ai M&A Multiples

Get M&A multiples trend by year

get_multiples_trend

Read-onlyIdempotent

Read-only. Year-by-year history for ONE sub-vertical: for each deal year 2018-2026, the median EV/EBITDA and/or EV/Revenue multiple with middle 50% (25th-75th percentile), deal count n and median deal value. Only years with at least 10 disclosed deals for a metric are shown; missing years are listed as gaps and never interpolated, so many sub-verticals have few or no years. Use it for 'are multiples rising or falling for X?' questions; use get_valuation_multiples for pooled current figures by deal size.

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": {
      "industry": "<industry>"
    },
    "name": "get_multiples_trend"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`metric`	No	Optional: ev_ebitda or ev_revenue. Omit to show both where published.
`industry`	Yes	Sub-vertical id from list_industries (e.g. 'hvac', 'dental-practice'), or a plain-English name ('HVAC', 'dentist', 'plumber', 'MSP'); plain names are mapped to the closest tracked category and the answer says which one was used.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

AddedOct 29, 2026

TDQS

A4.7/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already cover read-only/idempotent/non-destructive, so the description spends its words on non-obvious behavior instead: a minimum of 10 disclosed deals per metric-year, missing years reported as gaps, never interpolated, and the consequence that many sub-verticals have few or no years. That sparsity warning is exactly what an agent needs to avoid reporting a trend where none exists.

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?

Three sentences, front-loaded with the read-only marker and the data shape, then the data-threshold caveat, then the routing rule. No sentence is filler; the density is justified by the amount of real constraint carried.

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

Completeness5/5

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

No output schema exists, but the description fully specifies the return shape, the time window (2018-2026), the statistical fields, and the gap/omission semantics. An agent could answer correctly about expected output sparsity without calling the tool or reading a schema.

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%, and the schema already documents both parameters, including the omit-to-show-both default for metric and the plain-name mapping for industry. The description reinforces the one-industry constraint but adds no syntax or format detail beyond the schema, so this is baseline territory.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb and resource ('year-by-year history for ONE sub-vertical') and enumerates exactly what is returned per year: median EV/EBITDA and/or EV/Revenue, 25th-75th percentile, deal count n, median deal value. The single-industry scope is capitalized, which prevents the common misread of passing several industries.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Gives an explicit question pattern to route here ('are multiples rising or falling for X?') and names the sibling to use instead for the contrasting case: get_valuation_multiples for pooled current figures by deal size. That is a genuine when-to-use / when-not-to-use split.

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

All ExitValue.ai M&A Multiples tools Inspect

Try in Browser

One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources

Need Help?