PoliErgaleio

simulate_life_insurance_flush

Simulates a Cyprus unit-linked life insurance policy and calculates tax and returns from executed withdrawals only. Requests above available funds are capped and flagged; self-funded surrender taxes are included in household cash flows and IRR. Use to model withdrawals from an existing Cyprus life-insurance policy. Require actual policy terms, tax rate, historical policy records and future premium/withdrawal projections; ask for missing items and never generate policy history. Amounts requested above available funds are limited to executed proceeds, and tax/return figures follow those executed cash flows. Forecast returns are assumptions and must be identified as such.

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`age`	Yes	Current age of the policyholder.
`aumFee`	Yes	Annual management fee as a percent of fund value.
`gender`	Yes	Used to look up mortality rates.
`scenario`	No	Which scenario to report as the primary result (default userInput). All three are always returned for comparison.
`monthlyFee`	Yes	Fixed policy fee charged each month, EUR.
`taxBracket`	Yes	Marginal income tax rate applied to taxable surrender amounts and to premium relief, percent.
`projections`	Yes	Future years to simulate.
`historicalData`	Yes	Actual policy history; the last entry's endingBalance is the simulation's opening balance, and the 3/4-year lookbacks drive the safe limit.
`brokerReturnRate`	No	Annual return of the broker account, percent (used with useDifferentBrokerReturn).
`investmentReturn`	Yes	Annual percentage value (e.g. 2.5 for 2.5%). Supply the actual rate unless the user accepts a stated modelling default. Expected annual return inside the policy.
`capitalSumInsured`	Yes	Death benefit / sum insured, EUR. Mortality cost applies to the amount at risk above the fund value.
`contractStartYear`	Yes	Calendar year the policy started. Partial surrenders are only tax-free from the 4th policy year.
`reinvestWithdrawals`	No	When true, net withdrawals are reinvested in a broker account and IRR is computed on combined wealth.
`useDifferentBrokerReturn`	No	Use brokerReturnRate instead of investmentReturn for the broker account.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`irr`	No
`series`	No
`scenario`	No
`irrWithTax`	No
`assumptions`	No
`finalBalance`	No
`totalTaxPaid`	No
`irrWithoutTax`	No
`totalFeesPaid`	No
`totalTaxSaved`	No
`irrPerspective`	No
`totalWithdrawn`	No
`safeLimitByYear`	No
`finalBrokerBalance`	No
`finalPolicyBalance`	No
`scenarioComparison`	No
`totalMortalityCost`	No
`totalSelfFundedCost`	No
`irrUnavailableReason`	No
`irrWithTaxPerspective`	No
`netWithdrawalsPaidOut`	No
`mortalityDataAvailable`	No
`irrWithoutTaxPerspective`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedOct 29, 2026

TDQS

A4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral burden and does well: it discloses that over-requests are capped and flagged, that self-funded surrender taxes affect household cash flows and IRR, and that forecast returns are assumptions requiring labeling. It could be stronger by explicitly stating that the tool is a pure simulation with no persistent side effects.

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

Conciseness3/5

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

The purpose is front-loaded, but the description repeats the same capping/executed-withdrawals concept in two separate sentences. The core information is useful, yet the redundancy costs some conciseness.

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 complex 14-parameter simulation with no annotations and an output schema, the description covers the key domain constraints: required real policy data, no generated history, capping behavior, and assumption labeling. The schema and output schema handle the detailed parameter and return semantics.

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

Parameters3/5

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

Schema description coverage is 100%, so parameter meanings are already fully documented in the input schema. The description adds domain-level expectations such as using actual policy terms and not fabricating history, but it does not add parameter-specific syntax or constraints 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?

States a specific verb and resource: simulates a Cyprus unit-linked life insurance policy and calculates tax and returns from executed withdrawals. The added instruction 'Use to model withdrawals from an existing Cyprus life-insurance policy' clearly separates it from generic tax, pension, or portfolio siblings.

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?

Gives clear context for when to use the tool and lists required inputs (actual policy terms, tax rate, historical records, future projections). It also instructs the agent to ask for missing items and never generate policy history, though it does not explicitly name when not to use it or point to a specific alternative.

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

All PoliErgaleio 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?