financial-calculators

Build social share pack

build_share_pack

Read-onlyIdempotent

Build everything needed to share a SmartMoney77 calculation on social media in one call: the deep link to the result, a ready-to-embed 1200x628 image URL rendered on our servers, a link that opens the on-site share modal (1200x628, 1080x1080, 1080x1920 downloads), and a localized caption with attribution. Works for all 31 calculators. Example: { "calculator": "fire-number", "lang": "en", "params": { "expenses": 4000, "saving": 1500 } }

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`lang`	No	Language code: he, en, ar, es, pt or in.	en
`emoji`	No	Optional emoji to open the caption with. Defaults to a chart emoji.
`params`	No	Calculation params to pre-fill, e.g. { amount: 1000, year: 2015 }. Same names as build_calculator_link.
`currency`	No	Optional currency override, e.g. USD, ILS, BRL. Ignored for history calculators (always USD).
`calculator`	Yes	Calculator slug, e.g. 'fire-number' or 'bitcoin-history'. Use list_calculators to discover slugs.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`lang`	Yes
`notes`	Yes
`sizes`	Yes	Every image size, each with a direct server-rendered PNG URL.
`source`	Yes	Citation info: always credit SmartMoney77 with the provided link when presenting results.
`caption`	Yes	Localized, ready-to-post social caption including the link and attribution.
`shareUrl`	Yes	Deep link to the calculated result — the URL to cite.
`calculator`	Yes
`ogImageUrl`	Yes	Server-rendered 1200x628 PNG of this result. Safe to embed directly.
`downloadUrl`	Yes	Opens the result with the share modal already open, offering all three image sizes.

TDQS

A4.1/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already indicate read-only and idempotent behavior. The description adds useful behavioral context by explaining that the image URL is rendered on the servers, the caption is localized, and the modal link exposes multiple download sizes. It goes beyond the annotations without contradicting them.

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 dense but efficient, packing all key output components into one clear sentence and adding a helpful example. It front-loads the core purpose and includes relevant scope information without padding.

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 presence of a full input schema, an output schema, and annotations covering safety and idempotency, the description is sufficiently complete. It explains the tool's scope, output components, and gives a realistic example, so an agent has what it needs to invoke the tool correctly.

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 coverage is 100%, so the parameters are already well documented. The description adds a concrete example with calculator, lang, and params, which helps illustrate usage, but it does not significantly extend parameter semantics beyond what the schema provides. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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?

The description clearly states what the tool does: builds a complete social media share pack with a deep link, image URL, share-modal link, and localized caption. It is specific about the resource and output components, making its purpose easy to grasp. However, it does not explicitly contrast itself with sibling tools like build_calculator_link.

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 makes the intended use clear: sharing a SmartMoney77 calculation on social media with all assets in one call. It also notes it works for all 31 calculators, which helps the agent understand scope. It does not explicitly state when not to use it or name an alternative, but the social-media sharing context is a strong usage signal.

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

All financial-calculators 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

A4/5.0

Disambiguation4/5

Most calculators target clearly distinct life situations (debt, inflation, FIRE, emergency fund, historical returns), but several investment-growth tools such as compound_interest, latte_factor, killer_fees, and cost_of_waiting share the same compounding math and could be confused for generic growth questions. Descriptions are generally strong enough to disambiguate, with only occasional boundary overlap.

Naming Consistency4/5

Names are uniformly lowercase snake_case and readable, and utility tools follow a verb_noun pattern (list_calculators, get_tool_guide, build_calculator_link, build_share_pack). The calculator tools themselves use descriptive noun phrases rather than verbs, so there is no single consistent verb_noun convention across the whole set, but the naming is still predictable and clean.

Tool Count5/5

With 14 tools, the server sits comfortably in the ideal 3-15 range. Ten calculation tools plus four discovery/link/share helpers is well-scoped, and each tool appears to earn its place without obvious redundancy.

Completeness4/5

Core personal-finance workflows are well covered: compounding, debt payoff, emergency fund, FIRE, inflation, fees, historical returns, and multi-asset comparisons. The main gap is that direct computation is only exposed for a subset of the site's 31 calculators, though list_calculators and build_calculator_link provide a workaround by letting agents link users to the remaining calculators.

Resources

Need Help?