Skip to main content
Glama

India Sukanya Samriddhi Yojana

sukanya
Read-onlyIdempotent

Simulate Sukanya Samriddhi Yojana (SSY) sovereign small savings scheme for girl child education and marriage under Government of India statutory guidelines. Computes compounding at 8.2% p.a. with 21-year maturity schedule and Section 80C EEE tax exemption.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
girl_ageNoCurrent age of the girl child (must be under 10 years at account opening).
as_of_dateYesCivil date YYYY-MM-DD. Selects the rule pack in force on that date. Required: the engine will not assume a date.
yearly_depositYesAnnual deposit in INR (₹250 to ₹1,50,000, payable for 15 years).

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
traceNo
statusNo
currencyNo
as_of_dateNo
disclaimerNo
minor_unitsNo
rule_ids_usedNo
total_investedNo
maturity_amountNo
projection_fromNo
total_withdrawnNo
yearly_scheduleNo
contribution_yearsNo
total_tenure_yearsNo
deposit_day_of_monthNo
start_financial_yearNo
total_interest_earnedNo
fifth_day_rule_appliedNo
statutory_annual_limitNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
      +  "additionalProperties": true,
      +  "properties": {
      +    "as_of_date": {
      +      "type": [
      +        "string",
      +        "number",
      +        "null"
      +      ]
      +    },
      +    "contribution_years": {
      +      "type": [
      +        "string",
      +        "number",
      +        "null"
      +      ]
      +    },
      +    "currency": {
      +      "type": [
      +        "string",
      +        "number",
      +        "null"
      +      ]
      +    },
      +    "deposit_day_of_month": {
      +      "type": [
      +        "string",
      +        "number",
      +        "null"
      +      ]
      +    },
      +    "disclaimer": {
      +      "type": [
      +        "string",
      +        "number",
      +        "null"
      +      ]
      +    },
      +    "fifth_day_rule_applied": {
      +      "type": [
      +        "boolean",
      +        "null"
      +      ]
      +    },
      +    "maturity_amount": {
      +      "type": [
      +        "string",
      +        "number",
      +        "null"
      +      ]
      +    },
      +    "minor_units": {
      +      "type": [
      +        "object",
      +        "null"
      +      ]
      +    },
      +    "projection_from": {
      +      "type": [
      +        "string",
      +        "number",
      +        "null"
      +      ]
      +    },
      +    "rule_ids_used": {
      +      "type": [
      +        "array",
      +        "null"
      +      ]
      +    },
      +    "start_financial_year": {
      +      "type": [
      +        "string",
      +        "number",
      +        "null"
      +      ]
      +    },
      +    "status": {
      +      "type": [
      +        "string",
      +        "number",
      +        "null"
      +      ]
      +    },
      +    "statutory_annual_limit": {
      +      "type": [
      +        "string",
      +        "number",
      +        "null"
      +      ]
      +    },
      +    "total_interest_earned": {
      +      "type": [
      +        "string",
      +        "number",
      +        "null"
      +      ]
      +    },
      +    "total_invested": {
      +      "type": [
      +        "string",
      +        "number",
      +        "null"
      +      ]
      +    },
      +    "total_tenure_years": {
      +      "type": [
      +        "string",
      +        "number",
      +        "null"
      +      ]
      +    },
      +    "total_withdrawn": {
      +      "type": [
      +        "string",
      +        "number",
      +        "null"
      +      ]
      +    },
      +    "trace": {
      +      "type": [
      +        "array",
      +        "null"
      +      ]
      +    },
      +    "yearly_schedule": {
      +      "type": [
      +        "array",
      +        "null"
      +      ]
      +    }
      +  },
      +  "type": "object"
      +}
  2. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / as_of_date
      Added value: +{
      +  "description": "Civil date YYYY-MM-DD. Selects the rule pack in force on that date. Required: the engine will not assume a date.",
      +  "example": "2026-09-26",
      +  "pattern": "^\\d{4}-\\d{2}-\\d{2}$",
      +  "type": "string"
      +}
    • changedInput schema / required
      Previous value: -[
      -  "yearly_deposit"
      -]New value: +[
      +  "yearly_deposit",
      +  "as_of_date"
      +]
  3. Changed1 schema field changed
    • removedInput schema / properties / yearly_deposit / default
      Removed value: -150000
  4. Added

TDQS

B3.2/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive, closed-world behavior, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds domain behavior (compounding rate, 21-year maturity, Section 80C EEE exemption), but hardcoding '8.2% p.a.' sits uneasily with the schema's statement that as_of_date selects the governing rule pack, which could mislead on historical/future dates.

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

Conciseness4/5

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

Two dense sentences, front-loaded with the purpose and followed by the mechanics. No filler, though the second sentence packs rate, maturity and tax treatment into a single clause.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need no explanation, and the schema fully documents inputs. The main gap is the absence of when-to-use/routing guidance against the many sibling financial calculators.

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% – all three parameters, including the ₹250–₹1,50,000 deposit band and the under-10 age constraint, are documented in the schema. The description adds no parameter-level detail beyond that, so the baseline 3 applies.

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?

Names a specific verb ('Simulate') and a specific resource (Sukanya Samriddhi Yojana), including the girl-child scope, 8.2% rate and 21-year maturity. This clearly separates it from siblings like ppf or fd, though it never explicitly contrasts itself with them.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description says nothing about when to use this tool versus alternatives such as ppf or compound_wealth, nor about prerequisites (e.g., account-opening age limits are only in the schema). Usage is only inferable from the scheme name.

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

Try in Browser

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources