SecureLend Market

calculate_mortgage_payment

Read-only

Calculates full PITI mortgage payment (Principal, Interest, Taxes, Insurance) based on user-supplied property value, down payment, interest rate, loan term, and optional tax/insurance figures. Pure calculation using user inputs — no external data is accessed.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`downPayment`	Yes	The amount paid upfront in USD.
`interestRate`	Yes	The annual interest rate (e.g., 3.5 for 3.5%).
`homeInsurance`	Yes	The annual home insurance cost in USD.
`propertyValue`	Yes	The total value of the property in USD.
`loanTermInYears`	Yes	The duration of the loan in years.
`propertyTaxRate`	Yes	The annual property tax rate as a percentage (e.g., 1.2 for 1.2%).

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`loanAmount`	Yes	The total loan amount after down payment.
`monthlyPropertyTax`	Yes	The estimated monthly property tax payment.
`totalMonthlyPayment`	Yes	The total estimated monthly payment (PITI).
`monthlyHomeInsurance`	Yes	The estimated monthly home insurance payment.
`principalAndInterest`	Yes	The monthly payment for principal and interest.

TDQS

A4.1/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already set readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the description's 'Pure calculation using user inputs — no external data is accessed' adds valuable context about side effects and data privacy. It does not contradict annotations and reinforces the safe, self-contained nature of the operation.

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 only two sentences: the first front-loads the purpose and scope, the second adds a clear behavioral note. It is concise, free of fluff, and every sentence earns its place.

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?

For a 6-parameter tool with an output schema available, the description provides sufficient context: what it calculates, the inputs, and the pure-calculation nature. The 'optional' inaccuracy is a minor gap, but the description overall is complete enough for an agent to know when and how to invoke the tool.

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

Parameters2/5

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

Although the schema provides 100% description coverage with units and examples, the description calls tax/insurance figures 'optional' while the schema marks propertyTaxRate and homeInsurance as required. This contradicts the schema and adds no helpful semantic beyond what the schema already provides, so it is misleading.

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?

The description uses the specific verb 'Calculates' and names the exact resource 'full PITI mortgage payment', enumerating the input components. This distinguishes it from sibling 'calculate_loan_payment' by explicitly including taxes and insurance, making the purpose unambiguous.

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?

The description implies use when a user supplies property value, down payment, interest rate, term, and tax/insurance figures for a mortgage payment estimate. It notes 'Pure calculation using user inputs — no external data is accessed', giving useful context, but it does not explicitly name alternative tools or state when not to use this tool.

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

All SecureLend Market tools Inspect

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

A4.1/5.0

Disambiguation4/5

Most tools have clear, distinct purposes, but there are a few potentially confusing pairs. Compare_personal_banking and compare_savings_accounts overlap somewhat, and calculate_loan_payment could be mistaken for covering mortgages despite calculate_mortgage_payment existing. Overall, descriptions help resolve most ambiguity.

Naming Consistency5/5

Tool names follow a consistent verb_noun pattern throughout: compare_* for comparisons, calculate_* for calculations, display_* for forms, submit_* for submissions, and get_* for offers. All names use lowercase with underscores, creating a predictable and uniform naming scheme.

Tool Count4/5

With 22 tools, the count is on the higher side but appropriate given the broad financial marketplace domain. Each tool covers a specific product category or workflow step, so the size feels justified rather than bloated. It is slightly heavy but not excessive for the scope.

Completeness4/5

The tool surface covers comparison, calculation, lead generation, prequalification, document upload, and status tracking, forming a comprehensive marketplace workflow. Minor gaps exist, such as no tools for updating or canceling applications, but these are workarounds and the core user journey is well supported.

Resources

Need Help?