Utility Matrix

Software Purchase Risk Calculator

software-purchase-risk-calculator

Read-onlyIdempotent

Use when a user asks about risk of a software purchase or SaaS commitment.

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`numUsers`	No	numUsers used by this deterministic tool.
`setupHours`	No	setupHours used by this deterministic tool.
`integrationCount`	No	integrationCount used by this deterministic tool.
`internalHourlyCost`	No	internalHourlyCost used by this deterministic tool.
`monthlySubscription`	Yes	monthlySubscription used by this deterministic tool.
`changeManagementRisk`	No	changeManagementRisk used by this deterministic tool.
`contractLengthMonths`	No	contractLengthMonths used by this deterministic tool.
`vendorStabilityScore`	No	vendorStabilityScore used by this deterministic tool.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`next_step`	Yes
`risk_score`	Yes
`output_tier`	Yes
`monthly_cost`	Yes
`signal_value`	Yes
`next_step_url`	Yes
`why_follow_up`	Yes
`contract_total`	Yes
`interpretation`	Yes
`year1_sub_cost`	Yes
`contract_months`	Yes
`vendor_component`	Yes
`year1_labor_cost`	Yes
`year1_total_cost`	Yes
`affiliate_context`	No
`computation_basis`	Yes
`adoption_component`	Yes
`complexity_component`	Yes
`integration_component`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed16 schema fields changedSep 28, 2026
- addedInput schema / properties / changeManagementRisk / description
```
Added value: +"changeManagementRisk used by this deterministic tool."
```
- addedInput schema / properties / changeManagementRisk / examples
```
Added value: +[
+  1
+]
```
- addedInput schema / properties / contractLengthMonths / description
```
Added value: +"contractLengthMonths used by this deterministic tool."
```
- addedInput schema / properties / contractLengthMonths / examples
```
Added value: +[
+  1
+]
```
- addedInput schema / properties / integrationCount / description
```
Added value: +"integrationCount used by this deterministic tool."
```
- addedInput schema / properties / integrationCount / examples
```
Added value: +[
+  1
+]
```
- addedInput schema / properties / internalHourlyCost / description
```
Added value: +"internalHourlyCost used by this deterministic tool."
```
- addedInput schema / properties / internalHourlyCost / examples
```
Added value: +[
+  1
+]
```
- addedInput schema / properties / monthlySubscription / description
```
Added value: +"monthlySubscription used by this deterministic tool."
```
- addedInput schema / properties / monthlySubscription / examples
```
Added value: +[
+  1
+]
```
- addedInput schema / properties / numUsers / description
```
Added value: +"numUsers used by this deterministic tool."
```
- addedInput schema / properties / numUsers / examples
```
Added value: +[
+  1
+]
```
- addedInput schema / properties / setupHours / description
```
Added value: +"setupHours used by this deterministic tool."
```
- addedInput schema / properties / setupHours / examples
```
Added value: +[
+  1
+]
```
- addedInput schema / properties / vendorStabilityScore / description
```
Added value: +"vendorStabilityScore used by this deterministic tool."
```
- addedInput schema / properties / vendorStabilityScore / examples
```
Added value: +[
+  1
+]
```

Changed1 schema field changedJul 15, 2026

changedOutput schema / (root)

Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "additionalProperties": false,
+  "properties": {
+    "adoption_component": {
+      "type": "number"
+    },
+    "affiliate_context": {
+      "additionalProperties": false,
+      "properties": {
+        "affiliate": {
+          "type": "string"
+        },
+        "cta_label": {
+          "type": "string"
+        },
+        "disclosure": {
+          "type": "string"
+        },
+        "framing": {
+          "type": "string"
+        },
+        "posture": {
+          "enum": [
+            "secondary"
+          ],
+          "type": "string"
+        },
+        "slot_id": {
+          "type": "string"
+        },
+        "url": {
+          "type": "string"
+        },
+        "variant": {
+          "type": "string"
+        }
+      },
+      "required": [
+        "affiliate",
+        "cta_label",
+        "disclosure",
+        "framing",
+        "posture",
+        "slot_id",
+        "url",
+        "variant"
+      ],
+      "type": "object"
+    },
+    "complexity_component": {
+      "type": "number"
+    },
+    "computation_basis": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "contract_months": {
+      "type": "number"
+    },
+    "contract_total": {
+      "type": "number"
+    },
+    "integration_component": {
+      "type": "number"
+    },
+    "interpretation": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "monthly_cost": {
+      "type": "number"
+    },
+    "next_step": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "next_step_url": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "output_tier": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "risk_score": {
+      "type": "number"
+    },
+    "signal_value": {
+      "type": "number"
+    },
+    "vendor_component": {
+      "type": "number"
+    },
+    "why_follow_up": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "year1_labor_cost": {
+      "type": "number"
+    },
+    "year1_sub_cost": {
+      "type": "number"
+    },
+    "year1_total_cost": {
+      "type": "number"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "adoption_component",
+    "complexity_component",
+    "computation_basis",
+    "contract_months",
+    "contract_total",
+    "integration_component",
+    "interpretation",
+    "monthly_cost",
+    "next_step",
+    "next_step_url",
+    "output_tier",
+    "risk_score",
+    "signal_value",
+    "vendor_component",
+    "why_follow_up",
+    "year1_labor_cost",
+    "year1_sub_cost",
+    "year1_total_cost"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}

Changed1 schema field changedJul 13, 2026
- addedInput schema / additionalProperties
```
Added value: +false
```
First observedJun 29, 2026

TDQS

C2.5/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds nothing on top of that: no mention that the computation is deterministic, no note on how the 1-5 risk scales behave, no statement about what a caller gets back. With annotations carrying the safety load, this remains a gap rather than a strength.

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?

It is a single, front-loaded sentence with no filler, which is structurally clean. But for an 8-parameter tool the brevity edges into under-specification rather than disciplined conciseness.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness2/5

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 not be explained. Still, the tool takes 8 inputs including bounded ordinal scales (changeManagementRisk and vendorStabilityScore, both 1-5) whose directionality and meaning are undocumented anywhere, and the description does nothing to resolve that. For a multi-input scoring model this is incomplete.

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 nominally 100%, which sets the baseline at 3, but every parameter description is the same boilerplate ('X used by this deterministic tool') and conveys no domain meaning. The description itself supplies zero parameter guidance, so it neither compensates for nor improves on the schema.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose2/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description only supplies a trigger phrase ('Use when a user asks about risk of a software purchase or SaaS commitment') and never states what the tool actually computes or returns. It essentially restates the name/title 'Software Purchase Risk Calculator' in different words rather than adding a distinct verb+resource statement. An agent learns nothing beyond the already-visible tool name.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

The single sentence is a usage condition, so a trigger is provided ('risk of a software purchase or SaaS commitment'). However, there is no when-not guidance and no differentiation from the 31 siblings, several of which overlap heavily (total-cost-of-ownership-calculator, cloud-waste-calculator, reserved-instance-breakeven).

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

All Utility Matrix tools Inspect

Try in Browser

Shareable, User-Owned Context BackendPeople, applications, and agents read, write, and coordinate together in one context lake. Reach it over MCP, a CLI, a Python SDK, or REST.fulcradynamics.comAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources

Need Help?