Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

Equitest

by net.equitest
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Simulate a funding round

simulate_funding_round
Read-onlyIdempotent

Simulates a priced round without saving anything: price per share, new shares, option pool top-up to a target % post-money, conversion of open SAFEs/notes (lower of cap price and discounted price), and every stakeholder's % before and after.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "pre_money": "<pre_money>",
      "investment": "<investment>"
    },
    "name": "simulate_funding_round"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
dateNoYYYY-MM-DD
cap_tableNoCap table: company name (full or partial) or id from list_cap_tables. May be omitted when the user has one cap table.
pre_moneyYesPre-money valuation, cap table currency
investmentYesAmount invested in the round
investor_nameNoOptional name of the new investor
pool_target_pctNoOptional option pool after the round, % of fully diluted post-money

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Added

TDQS

A4.1/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false, and the description is consistent with them by emphasizing nothing is saved. It adds real behavior beyond the annotations by disclosing the SAFE/note conversion rule ('lower of cap price and discounted price'), which is a non-obvious pricing decision an agent could not discover elsewhere.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence that leads with the core action and the no-persistence guarantee, then lists outputs. It is dense but every clause carries information; the long colon-list makes it slightly harder to scan than a two-sentence split would.

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?

With 6 parameters, full schema coverage, and no output schema, the description covers the calculation mechanics and even sketches the return shape ('every stakeholder's % before and after'). Minor omissions remain around the date parameter's effect and how existing SAFEs are discovered from the cap table.

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; the description goes modestly beyond it by clarifying that the pool top-up targets a percentage of fully diluted post-money and that SAFE/note conversion happens automatically rather than via a parameter. It does not clarify the optional date or investor_name semantics, leaving a small gap.

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 verb and resource ('Simulates a priced round') and enumerates the exact computations produced: price per share, new shares, option pool top-up, SAFE/note conversion, and before/after ownership. The 'without saving anything' clause cleanly separates it from the sibling mutation tool record_cap_table_transaction without needing to open either schema.

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 'without saving anything' phrasing implies the scenario for use (hypothetical/what-if rounds) and implicitly rules out persisting results, but it never names an alternative tool or states a when-not condition explicitly. An agent can infer the intent but must reason about it rather than being routed.

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

All Equitest toolsInspect
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.

Resources