SmartMoney77

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

A4.2/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and idempotentHint=true, so the description does not need to restate safety. The description adds meaningful behavioral context beyond those annotations: the image is a server-rendered 1200x628 URL, the modal link supports three download dimensions, and the caption is localized with attribution. No contradiction 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 front-loaded with the core action, then lists all returned assets in a single dense sentence with no filler. The 'Works for all 31 calculators' line and the JSON example are both useful and earn their place. Nothing extraneous is present.

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?

Given five parameters, a nested params object, a true output schema, and read-only/idempotent annotations, the description plus schema cover what an agent needs to invoke the tool: target resources, dimensions, localization, calculator scope, and a realistic example. It does not discuss edge cases or server-rendering limitations, but the output schema and annotations close most of that gap.

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%, with each parameter already documented via enum/default/description, including currency override behavior for history calculators and the instruction to use list_calculators for slug discovery. The description's example usefully shows how calculator, lang, and params fit together, but it does not add meaning beyond the schema's parameter documentation, so it stays at the baseline.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Build everything needed to share a SmartMoney77 calculation on social media in one call.' It then enumerates the exact deliverables (deep link, 1200x628 image URL, share-modal link, localized caption), which clearly distinguishes it from the sibling build_calculator_link. 'Works for all 31 calculators' further clarifies the scope.

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 phrase 'needed to share ... in one call' gives clear context for when this tool should be selected, and the scope statement 'Works for all 31 calculators' helps an agent gauge applicability. It does not explicitly name build_calculator_link as the lighter alternative or state when-not-to-use this tool, so it stops short of a full 5.

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

All SmartMoney77 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 tools target clearly distinct financial scenarios or actions, and the descriptions make boundaries easy to identify. The only slight overlaps are compare_investments vs historical_investment_return and build_calculator_link vs build_share_pack, but these are differentiated by single-asset vs multi-asset and simple link vs full share package.

Naming Consistency3/5

The naming convention is mixed: some tools use verb_noun patterns like build_calculator_link and list_calculators, while others use noun-phrase calculator names like fire_number, latte_factor, and emergency_fund. The names are readable, but there is no single consistent convention across the set.

Tool Count5/5

14 tools is a well-scoped size for a personal-finance calculator server. Each calculator tool has a distinct purpose, and the discovery, linking, and sharing utilities round out the set without feeling bloated or sparse.

Completeness4/5

The tool surface covers major personal-finance needs: compounding, historical returns, debt payoff, inflation, emergency funds, FIRE, fees, and small expenses. Minor gaps exist since the server mentions 31 calculators but only directly computes a subset; however, list_calculators and build_calculator_link mitigate this by enabling access to the broader catalog.

Resources

Need Help?