LLPRO Campus

Calculate or audit a distribution waterfall between investors and sponsor

waterfall_and_distribution

Read-onlyIdempotent

Waterfall and distribution calculator and audit for syndications and small funds. Send the terms (preferred return percent, simple or compound, carry percent, optional catch-up percent), the capital contributed (date, amount) and the cash distributed (date, amount). Get back, per distribution, the split between investors and sponsor tier by tier, with balances left. Add claimed_investors and claimed_sponsor to a distribution to audit a spreadsheet or administrator's figures: you get match or differ to the cent, whether the claim adds up to the cash, and which other reading of the terms (day count 360 or 365, compounding, no preferred return, catch-up on or off) would reproduce it. Answer fields: verdict, summary, distributions (in your order, each with index, tiers, to_investors, to_sponsor, audit), reproduced_by, sources, rule, observation, signature; all money is text. Errors: ok false with a message (400 bad input, 413 too large, 429 hourly limit). Free. No model, no network, no request contents stored, signed record. Up to 100 contributions and 100 distributions. Use your own labels, not names or account numbers. Not legal, tax, investment or accounting advice; your fund documents decide.

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": {
      "terms": "<terms>",
      "contributions": "<contributions>",
      "distributions": "<distributions>"
    },
    "name": "waterfall_and_distribution"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`terms`	Yes
`tolerance`	No	Largest difference in money that still counts as a match, 0 to 1 (default 0.01).
`fund_label`	No	Your own label for the deal (not a person).
`contributions`	Yes
`distributions`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

AddedNov 13, 2026

TDQS

A4.6/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already declare read-only, idempotent, non-destructive, closed-world behavior, and the description adds substantial context beyond them: error codes (400/413/429 hourly limit), no model or network, no request contents stored, a signed record, caps of 100 contributions and 100 distributions, and a privacy instruction to use labels rather than names or account numbers. This is exactly the extra behavioral surface an agent needs before sending financial data.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Front-loaded with purpose, then usage, then return fields, then operational limits and disclaimer. It is dense but nearly every clause carries information; the enumerated answer-field list is long but justified because there is no output schema. Minor redundancy in the trailing disclaimer and limits sentence.

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?

With no output schema, the description compensates by enumerating the response fields (verdict, summary, distributions with index/tiers/to_investors/to_sponsor/audit, reproduced_by, sources, rule, observation, signature) and noting money is text. Combined with the error model, size limits, and privacy guidance, an agent could call this correctly without further information.

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 coverage is reported at 40%, so the description must carry weight, and it does: it names the terms fields (preferred return percent, simple/compound, carry percent, optional catch-up), the date+amount shape of contributions and distributions, and the meaning of the claimed_* audit fields. It stops short of restating constraints like the 0-50 carry range or the 2-decimal exactness rule, which remain schema-only.

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+resource pair: a waterfall and distribution calculator and auditor for syndications and small funds. It immediately conveys both modes (calculate vs. audit) and the domain (investor/sponsor splits), which no sibling tool covers.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

Clearly explains the two invocation modes: send terms/contributions/distributions to calculate, or add claimed_investors and claimed_sponsor to a distribution to audit an external figure, including the instruction to send both claimed fields. It lacks an explicit when-not-to-use statement or named alternative, but the conditional guidance is otherwise concrete.

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

All LLPRO Campus 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?