profitability-market

calculate_dividend_yield

Read-onlyIdempotent

Calculate dividend yield: annual dividends per share divided by share price — the cash return a shareholder receives from dividends. Formula: Dividend Yield = Annual Dividends Per Share / Share Price. WHEN TO USE: Use to compare income return against bond yields or peer dividend policies; a yield far above peers can signal a depressed price or unsustainable payout. WHEN NOT TO USE: Do NOT annualise a one-off special dividend as if it were regular income. BEHAVIOUR: pure deterministic calculation — no side effects, no network or storage access; idempotent and non-destructive; identical inputs always produce identical outputs. Division by zero or non-finite inputs returns an explicit error instead of a number. RETURNS: JSON object { dividend_yield: decimal (e.g. 0.035 = 3.5%), dividend_yield_pct: number (e.g. 3.5), inputs }. PARAMETERS: annual_dividends_per_share (required): Annual dividends per share, e.g. 1.58. Must be >= 0. share_price (required): Current share price, e.g. 45.00. Must be > 0.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`share_price`	Yes	Current share price, e.g. 45.00. Must be > 0.
`annual_dividends_per_share`	Yes	Annual dividends per share, e.g. 1.58. Must be >= 0.

TDQS

A4.7/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

The description explicitly states the calculation is pure, deterministic, side-effect free, idempotent, and non-destructive, and discloses division-by-zero/non-finite error behavior. This adds real behavioral context beyond the annotations, which already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint. One small gap: it does not describe the shape of the error object returned, but the core behavioral contract is clearly stated.

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 compact and well-structured with clear sections: definition, formula, when-to-use, when-not-to-use, behavior, returns, and parameters. Every sentence carries information an agent needs, and the key formula is front-loaded so an agent can immediately classify the tool and its inputs.

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?

For a two-parameter pure calculation with full schema coverage and clear annotations, the description covers every behavioral aspect: the formula, input constraints, division-by-zero handling, return format with examples, and usage boundaries. Nothing an agent needs to invoke it correctly is missing.

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%, and the description reinforces each parameter's meaning and constraints (must be >= 0, must be > 0) with concrete examples. It adds the formula context connecting the two parameters and clarifies that the result represents cash return. This is a solid baseline-plus contribution, though the examples mostly echo 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 precise verb-resource pairing: 'Calculate dividend yield' followed by the exact formula. It distinguishes itself from the financial-ratio sibling tools by defining its specific inputs (annual dividends per share, share price) and output (dividend yield as a decimal and percentage).

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?

Explicit WHEN TO USE and WHEN NOT TO USE sections. The when-to-use directs agents toward comparing income returns against bond yields or peer dividend policies, and the when-not-to-use warns against annualizing a one-off special dividend — a genuinely useful decision rule that no formulaitc sibling would share.

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

All profitability-market 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

A4.7/5.0

Disambiguation5/5

Each tool calculates a distinct financial metric with its own formula, inputs, and output. Even similarly named return-on-capital tools (ROA, ROE, ROCE, ROIC) are clearly differentiated by their denominators and described use cases.

Naming Consistency5/5

All 12 tools follow the exact same calculate_<metric_name> snake_case pattern. The verb is consistent and metric names map directly to the formulas, making the set highly predictable.

Tool Count5/5

Twelve tools is a well-scoped size for a financial ratio calculator covering profitability, return, valuation, and dividend metrics. Each tool addresses a distinct calculation and none feel redundant or unnecessary.

Completeness4/5

The tool surface covers core profitability margins, return ratios, EPS, dividend yield, payout ratio, P/E, and P/B. Minor gaps exist such as price-to-sales, EV/EBITDA, or EBITDA margin, but the primary domain of profitability and market valuation is well represented.

Resources

Need Help?