Skip to main content
Glama

valuation-api

calculate_dcf

Read-onlyIdempotent

Compute a Discounted Cash Flow (DCF) valuation: enterprise value from projected free cash flows plus a Gordon-growth terminal value. WHEN TO USE: to value a company or asset from its projected free cash flows, WACC and perpetual terminal growth rate (standard corporate/asset valuation). WHEN NOT TO USE: for a single-exit lump-sum investment (use calculate_irr), or when you need the discount rate itself (use calculate_wacc). BEHAVIOUR: pure deterministic calculation — no side effects, no network or storage access; idempotent and non-destructive. Terminal value uses the Gordon Growth Model; it is only defined when wacc is strictly greater than terminal_growth_rate. RETURNS: JSON object { inputs, results: { present_value, terminal_value, enterprise_value } }, each rounded to 2dp. present_value is the discounted explicit-period FCFs; enterprise_value = present_value + discounted terminal value (debt and cash are NOT netted — this is enterprise value, not equity value). PARAMETERS: free_cash_flows (array of per-period projected free cash flows, typically positive; the first element is discounted by one period), wacc (decimal, e.g. 0.10 = 10% — never pass percentage points; must be > terminal_growth_rate), terminal_growth_rate (decimal perpetual growth rate, e.g. 0.03 = 3% — never pass percentage points; must be < wacc).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
waccYesWeighted average cost of capital as a decimal, e.g. 0.10 = 10% (never pass percentage points). Must be strictly greater than terminal_growth_rate.
free_cash_flowsYesProjected free cash flows per period, e.g. [5000000, 6000000, 7000000, 8000000, 9000000]. Typically positive; first element discounted one period.
terminal_growth_rateYesPerpetual terminal growth rate as a decimal, e.g. 0.03 = 3% (never pass percentage points). Must be strictly less than wacc, otherwise terminal value is undefined.

TDQS

A4.6/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the readOnlyHint and idempotentHint annotations, the description adds meaningful behavioral detail: no side effects, no network/storage access, pure deterministic calculation, and a terminal value condition (wacc must be strictly greater than terminal_growth_rate). It also discloses the exact return shape and rounding behavior, which is especially valuable because there is no output schema.

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?

The description is long but well-structured with clear labeled sections: purpose, WHEN TO USE, WHEN NOT TO USE, BEHAVIOUR, RETURNS, and PARAMETERS. Each section earns its place; some redundancy with annotations exists, but the organized format makes the content easy to scan and act on.

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?

This is a complete description for a tool of moderate complexity. It covers input semantics, constraints, return format, rounding, the Gordon Growth condition, and a key interpretive caveat: enterprise value vs equity value (debt and cash are not netted). Since there is no output schema, the explicit RETURNS section fills an important 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%, so the baseline is 3. The description reinforces parameter meaning with examples and constraints, such as 'wacc (decimal, e.g. 0.10 = 10% — never pass percentage points)' and 'the first element is discounted by one period,' but most of this is already present in the schema descriptions. It adds minimal new semantic value 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?

The description opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Compute a Discounted Cash Flow (DCF) valuation: enterprise value from projected free cash flows plus a Gordon-growth terminal value.' This clearly distinguishes the tool from siblings like calculate_irr and calculate_wacc, and the scope of what is computed is unambiguous.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

The description includes explicit 'WHEN TO USE' and 'WHEN NOT TO USE' sections. It names concrete alternatives: use calculate_irr for single-exit lump-sum investments and calculate_wacc when the discount rate itself is needed, leaving no doubt about tool selection.

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.

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Disambiguation5/5

Every tool targets a distinct financial metric or formula, and the WHEN TO USE / WHEN NOT TO USE guidance clearly separates closely related concepts like DSO vs. receivables turnover, current vs. quick vs. cash ratio, and DPI/RVPI/TVPI. Even the overlapping investment-return tools (NPV, IRR, MOIC, payback) are explicitly differentiated.

Naming Consistency4/5

The overwhelming majority of tools follow a clean calculate_<metric> snake_case pattern, making the set highly predictable. The single exception is irr_sensitivity, which breaks the calculate_ prefix convention but is still readable and not chaotic.

Tool Count2/5

At 52 tools, this far exceeds the 25+ threshold where a tool set becomes too heavy for its scope. Although each tool is a distinct pure calculation, the sheer breadth creates a large navigation and selection burden for agents.

Completeness4/5

The server covers an unusually broad range of valuation workflows: time value of money, DCF/WACC/cost of capital, relative valuation multiples, profitability/liquidity/efficiency ratios, and private equity fund metrics. Minor gaps exist, such as no dedicated free cash flow, net debt, or EBITDA margin calculators, but these are workable around.

Resources