Intangible Asset Valuation MCP Server

Market Approach

valuation_market_approach

Read-onlyIdempotent

Market approach: value from comparable transaction revenue multiples or capitalize a royalty stream into a perpetuity value. Method selects the formula. Use when reliable comparable transactions or royalty rates exist for the subject asset. For income-based excess earnings use valuation_income_methods; for royalty-rate selection and adjustment use valuation_royalty_analysis. Per method: comparable_transactions needs comparables + subject_revenue (optional: adjustments); royalty_capitalization needs revenue + royalty_rate + discount_rate. Each comparable is {revenue, multiple}; comparable_transactions applies the comparable multiple to subject_revenue. Only method is required; other parameters are method-dependent, so supply those named for the selected method and omit the rest (documented defaults apply where defined). Pure arithmetic: no I/O and no external calls, and numeric results are returned rounded to 2 decimals. Parameters belonging to other methods of this tool are accepted and ignored. Supplying an unknown method, or leaving unset a parameter that the chosen method requires, returns an error instead of a value.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`method`	Yes	Formula to apply. Options: comparable_transactions = Subject revenue times the median comparable multiple.; royalty_capitalization = Value = (revenue * royalty rate) / discount rate.
`revenue`	No	Annual revenue attributable to the asset, in currency units.
`adjustments`	No	Optional multiplicative adjustments, e.g. {"size": 0.9, "growth": 1.1}.
`comparables`	No	Comparable transactions, each {revenue, multiple}.
`royalty_rate`	No	Royalty rate as a decimal (0.05 = 5% of revenue).
`discount_rate`	No	Per-period discount rate as a decimal (0.10 = 10%).
`subject_revenue`	No	Subject company revenue, in currency units.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`error`	No	Error message when the call fails.
`steps`	No	Intermediate calculation steps for traceability (one string per step).
`value`	Yes	Computed valuation, rate, or metric.
`method`	No	Formula / method name that produced the result.
`assumptions`	No	Modelling assumptions applied (list of strings or key/value object).
`formula_reference`	No	Mathematical formula or reference applied.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedSep 30, 2026

TDQS

A4.8/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already establish read-only/idempotent/closed-world/no-destruction, and the description adds substantial context beyond them: pure arithmetic with no I/O or external calls, results rounded to 2 decimals, unknown methods and missing required params return errors rather than values, and parameters for other methods are accepted and ignored.

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?

Front-loaded with the method definition, then usage routing, then per-method parameter guidance. Dense but each sentence carries distinct information; the description is somewhat long but not padded.

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?

Given an existing output schema, the description needn't explain return values, and it covers the remaining gaps: method selection, per-method required parameters, error behavior, and the arithmetic nature of the tool. 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%, so the baseline is 3, but the description goes further: it maps which parameters each method requires (comparables + subject_revenue; revenue + royalty_rate + discount_rate), explains the comparable object shape, and specifies that method-dependent parameters may be omitted with defaults applying. It does not add syntax detail beyond the schema for the numbers themselves.

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 valuation method (comparable transaction multiples / royalty capitalization) with the actual formulas, and explicitly distinguishes itself from siblings valuation_income_methods and valuation_royalty_analysis. An agent can tell exactly what this tool computes.

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?

Names the conditions for use ('when reliable comparable transactions or royalty rates exist') and routes to the two alternatives by name with their respective use cases. When-to-use and when-not-to-use are both covered.

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

All Intangible Asset Valuation MCP Server tools Inspect

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.