Skip to main content
Glama

Moltline Merchant Maths

by com.moltlinestudio

Installment Plan

installment_plan
Read-onlyIdempotent

Split a total into an installment schedule with optional deposit. PREMIUM (license).

Rounding remainders land on the final payment so the schedule always sums exactly. Typical input {"total": 1000, "installments": 3, "deposit_pct": 10} returns {"deposit": 100.0, "payments": [300.0, 300.0, 300.0], "check_sum": 1000.0}.

Use when one total is paid across scheduled dates. Not for partial-period adjustments (proration). Errors: on invalid, missing, or malformed input this tool never raises a protocol error — it returns {"error": ""} (for example {"error": "total > 0 and 1-36 installments"}). Every call is read-only and idempotent, so after correcting the input it is always safe to retry.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
totalYesFull amount to split; must be greater than 0.
deposit_pctNoOptional upfront deposit as a percentage of total, e.g. 10 for 10%. Default 0.
installmentsYesNumber of payments after the deposit; 1 to 36.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

TDQS

A4.8/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Discloses read-only and idempotent nature (consistent with annotations) and adds critical behavioral traits: 'Rounding remainders land on the final payment so the schedule always sums exactly' and 'never raises a protocol error — it returns {"error": ...}'. These go beyond annotations.

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?

Well-structured: first sentence defines purpose, then rounding guarantee, then example, then usage guidance, then error handling. Every sentence is informative; no filler. Front-loaded with most important info.

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?

Given the tool's moderate complexity (3 parameters, output schema exists), the description covers purpose, behavior, usage, error handling, and provides a typical example. The output schema is not shown but the example compensates. Complete for an agent to select and invoke correctly.

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

Parameters5/5

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

Schema coverage is 100% with descriptions, but the description adds value with a concrete example showing exact input-output mapping and rounding behavior. This clarifies parameter semantics beyond the schema.

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?

Clearly states the tool splits a total into an installment schedule with optional deposit. Distinguishes from sibling proration by explicitly saying 'Not for partial-period adjustments (proration)'. The verb 'split' and resource 'total into installment schedule' are specific.

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?

Explicitly states when to use: 'Use when one total is paid across scheduled dates'. Provides a clear exclusion: 'Not for partial-period adjustments (proration)'. Does not differentiate from other siblings like discount_stack or invoice_total, but the use case is distinct enough.

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

All Moltline Merchant Maths toolsInspect
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

A4.6/5.0
Disambiguation5/5

Each tool serves a distinct pricing/financial calculation: gross-up from net (charge_to_net), stacking discounts (discount_stack), installment schedules (installment_plan), invoice totals (invoice_total), processor fee breakdown (processor_fees), and proration (proration). Even closely related tools like charge_to_net and processor_fees are clearly inverses, with descriptions explicitly noting when to use one versus the other.

Naming Consistency4/5

All six tool names use a clear noun or noun phrase with underscores, following a consistent pattern (e.g., charge_to_net, discount_stack, installment_plan). The only minor deviation is that some names are verb-first (charge_to_net) while others are noun-first (processor_fees), but the pattern is predictable and readable.

Tool Count5/5

With six tools, the set is well-scoped for a merchant/pricing MCP server. Each tool covers a common financial calculation need (fees, discounts, installments, invoicing, proration) without bloat. The count is lean yet sufficient for its domain.

Completeness4/5

The tool set covers core merchant calculations: gross-up, fee breakdown, discount stacking, installment plans, invoice totaling, and proration. Minor gaps include missing currency conversion or tax jurisdiction handling, but for a focused pricing/fee calculator the coverage is solid.

Resources