Zain Ahmed Platform MCP Server

calculate_finops_roi

Read-only

Use this tool when modeling estimated monthly and annual cloud cost savings from Karpenter container bin-packing, spot orchestration, and Graviton migration. Returns itemized ROI projections in USD.

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": {
      "monthlyCloudSpend": "<monthlyCloudSpend>"
    },
    "name": "calculate_finops_roi"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`cloudProvider`	No	Cloud provider (AWS, GCP, Azure, OCI)
`monthlyCloudSpend`	Yes	Current monthly cloud spend in USD

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`estimatedAnnualSavings`	Yes
`estimatedMonthlySavings`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedNov 13, 2026

TDQS

A3.8/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds that the output is a projection/estimate ("estimated") denominated in USD, which appropriately frames the result as non-binding. It omits any statement about assumptions, accuracy caveats, or that the levers are fixed rather than configurable.

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?

Two sentences, zero filler, with the triggering condition front-loaded before the return-value note. Every clause carries information an agent can act on.

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?

For a two-parameter, read-only calculator with full schema coverage, annotations, and an output schema, the description covers purpose, modeled levers, and output units. The only real omission is whether cloudProvider is optional/defaulted and what modeling assumptions underpin the projection.

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 both parameters (cloudProvider, monthlyCloudSpend) are already fully documented and the baseline is 3. The description mentions none of them explicitly, though naming the fixed optimization levers implicitly explains why no lever parameters exist. That is a modest addition rather than compensation for a gap.

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

Purpose4/5

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

States a specific verb+resource: estimating monthly/annual cloud cost savings from named levers (Karpenter bin-packing, spot orchestration, Graviton migration). An agent immediately knows this is an ROI calculator, not a spend query. It does not explicitly differentiate from siblings, but no sibling in the supplied set overlaps, so the cost is low.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

"Use this tool when modeling estimated monthly and annual cloud cost savings..." gives a clear triggering condition tied to the modeling task. It stops short of stating when-not to use it or naming an alternative (e.g., a raw cost-lookup tool), so it does not reach the 5 bar.

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

All Zain Ahmed Platform 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.

Resources

Need Help?