Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

The Comp Desk Builder

by com.thecompdesk
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

NY attorney fee split with prior counsel

calculate_fee_split
Read-onlyIdempotent

Divides an attorney fee between the current attorney and one or two prior counsel the way every Comp Desk tile does: each prior counsel gets the dollar amount given, the current attorney the rest, worked in whole cents; prior amounts above the fee are flagged as over-allocated (nothing can be requested). Also gives the OC-400.1 amount: the current attorney's share rounded down to the nearest $5. The fee the Board approves can differ. New York State only. Computes with The Comp Desk calc-core, the same engine as the app and the Pro Workspace; it never estimates. A missing input returns status "missing" and nothing is calculated. Returns the figures, the steps with the rule and engine function behind each, and the not-legal-advice notice. Needs your builder key. Same engine the Pro Workspace tiles call through CD.Calc, so a figure here matches the app to the cent.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "total_fee": "<total_fee>",
      "prior_counsel_fees": "<prior_counsel_fees>"
    },
    "name": "calculate_fee_split"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
total_feeYesThe total attorney fee, in dollars (for example the fee a calculator returned).
prior_counsel_feesYesDollar amount of the fee apportioned to each prior counsel (one or two).

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly/idempotent/non-destructive, and the description adds substantial context beyond them: a builder key is required, a missing input returns status "missing" with nothing calculated, math is done in whole cents with the OC-400.1 share rounded down to the nearest $5, and the Board-approved fee may differ from the result. It also discloses the return payload (figures, steps with rule and engine function, not-legal-advice notice) and that the underlying engine is deterministic rather than estimating.

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 core behavior is front-loaded effectively in the first two sentences, but the engine-identity claim is repeated twice ('the same engine as the app and the Pro Workspace' and 'Same engine the Pro Workspace tiles call through CD.Calc'), and 'the way every Comp Desk tile does' is filler. The result is longer than needed for a two-parameter calculator.

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 simple two-param calculator with no output schema, the description covers inputs, edge cases (over-allocation, missing input), rounding rules, auth requirements, and the general shape of the response. It lacks a precise return structure and does not state what happens if the remainder is negative or how cents are distributed on rounding, leaving minor gaps.

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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3, but the description adds real allocation semantics: prior_counsel_fees is treated as a fixed dollar amount taken off the top and the current attorney receives the remainder, which is not evident from the schema field text alone. It also explains the over-allocation condition for out-of-range values.

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: divides an attorney fee between the current attorney and one or two prior counsel, and additionally produces the OC-400.1 amount. The scope (New York only) and the mechanism (each prior counsel gets the stated dollar amount, current attorney gets the remainder) make it clearly distinguishable from siblings like calculate_section_32_split or calculate_apportionment.

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 applicability conditions: 'New York State only', one or two prior counsel, and the caveat that prior amounts above the fee are flagged as over-allocated so nothing can be requested. It does not explicitly name a sibling alternative for non-NY or non-fee-split questions, so it stops short of full routing guidance.

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

All The Comp Desk Builder toolsInspect
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