Skip to main content
Glama

Moltline Merchant Maths

by com.moltlinestudio

Processor Fees

processor_fees
Read-onlyIdempotent

Break down payment-processor fees: fee, net, and effective rate. FREE.

Uses editable presets for stripe/paypal/square/shopify (verify current rates) or your own custom_pct + custom_fixed. Typical input {"amount": 1000, "processor": "stripe", "transactions": 10} returns {"gross": 1000, "fee": 32.0, "net": 968.0, "effective_rate_pct": 3.2, "note": "..."}.

Use when the charge amount is known and the net payout is the question. Not for the reverse: the gross needed to net a target is charge_to_net. Errors: on invalid, missing, or malformed input this tool never raises a protocol error — it returns {"error": ""} (for example {"error": "amount must be > 0, transactions >= 1"}). Every call is read-only and idempotent, so after correcting the input it is always safe to retry.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
amountYesTotal gross amount processed; must be greater than 0.
processorNoOne of "stripe", "paypal", "square", "shopify", or "custom". Default "stripe".stripe
custom_pctNoPercentage fee used when processor is "custom", e.g. 2.5 for 2.5%.
custom_fixedNoFixed per-transaction fee used when processor is "custom", e.g. 0.25.
transactionsNoHow many transactions the amount is spread across; at least 1. Default 1.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

TDQS

A4.9/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

The description goes beyond the annotations (readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint) by detailing the error mode: 'never raises a protocol error — it returns {"error": "..."}'. It also explicitly states 'Every call is read-only and idempotent', reinforcing safety and retry suitability. No contradictions with 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?

The description is concise with no fluff. It is front-loaded with the core purpose, then provides examples, usage guidance, and error handling in a logical order. Every sentence earns its place, and the length is appropriate for the tool's complexity.

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?

Despite having an output schema, the description includes a sample output, which aids understanding. It covers inputs (including custom presets), typical values, error return format, and safety guarantees. The tool is fully described for correct invocation and interpretation.

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?

The input schema has 100% description coverage, so the baseline is 3. The description adds value by providing a typical usage example (amount, processor, transactions) and clarifying that custom_pct is a percentage (e.g., 2.5 for 2.5%). It also explains the relationship between parameters (custom fields only used with 'custom' processor). This enriches understanding 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?

The description clearly states the tool's purpose: 'Break down payment-processor fees: fee, net, and effective rate.' It uses specific verbs and resources, and explicitly distinguishes from the sibling tool 'charge_to_net' by noting the reverse use case. This makes the purpose unambiguous and differentiated from alternatives.

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?

The description provides explicit guidance: 'Use when the charge amount is known and the net payout is the question. Not for the reverse: the gross needed to net a target is charge_to_net.' It also explains error handling and safe retry behavior, giving clear context for when and how to use the tool.

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