FreeDailyPro Tools

converters_debt_payoff

Read-onlyIdempotent

Debt payoff planner: avalanche and snowball plans with payoff dates, interest and a minimums-only baseline

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": {
      "debts": "<debts>"
    },
    "name": "converters_debt_payoff"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`debts`	Yes	The debts to pay off, 1 to 30.
`strategy`	No	avalanche = highest rate first, snowball = smallest balance first, both (default) returns both and compares them.
`startDate`	No	Date of the first payment, YYYY-MM-DD. Adds a payoff date for every debt and the debt-free date.
`extraMonthly`	No	Money you can add each month on top of all the minimums. Send this or totalMonthlyBudget.
`totalMonthlyBudget`	No	Total you can pay each month across all debts (at least the sum of the minimums).

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

AddedOct 31, 2026

TDQS

A3.7/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already cover the safety profile (readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive, closed-world), so the description's job is to add what the annotations cannot. It does that by disclosing the computation's outputs: payoff dates, interest totals, and a minimums-only baseline for comparison, which tells an agent more about the result shape than the annotations do. It stops short of describing error conditions or how the baseline is computed.

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?

A single tight clause that front-loads the resource type, then the methods, then the outputs. Zero filler and no repetition of schema content.

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 read-only calculator with five fully documented parameters and no output schema, the description gives enough about what comes back (payoff dates, interest, baseline comparison) that an agent can decide it is the right tool. It omits currency/units and any indication of output structure, which keeps it from a 5.

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 schema already documents every parameter including the strategy enum and the extraMonthly/totalMonthlyBudget alternative. The description adds nothing parameter-specific beyond strategy naming, so it sits at the baseline-plus level rather than adding independent value.

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?

Names a specific domain (debt payoff planning) and the two concrete methods it implements (avalanche, snowball), plus the outputs it produces (payoff dates, interest, minimums-only baseline). It does not explicitly differentiate itself from near-neighbors like converters_amortization, converters_loan_interest, or calculate_loan, so an agent must infer the distinction.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

The description never states when to use this tool, when not to, or which sibling tools (e.g. converters_amortization, calculate_loan) cover overlapping needs. Usage is only implied by the resource being named; no prerequisites or input-format guidance are given.

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

All FreeDailyPro Tools 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?