Skip to main content
Glama
Savvly

savvly-mcp

Project Savvly Monthly Contributions

project_savvly_monthly
Read-onlyIdempotent

Project monthly contributions to a longevity benefit, comparing payouts at milestone ages 80-95 against a market-only portfolio. Provides per-age breakdowns with upper and lower range bounds for downside communication.

Instructions

Retirement projection for monthly contributions to the Savvly Longevity Benefit over a number of years. Returns payout amounts at milestone ages 80/85/90/95 with Savvly vs market alone cumulative totals, per-age breakdowns, and server-provided _lower/_upper range bounds. Use _upper as the central illustrative estimate and _lower to communicate downside. Suitable for retirement savings planning, annuity alternative comparison, and longevity benefit illustration. Supports an optional annual contribution increase and an optional early-withdrawal age. Contributions must finish by age 80: an omitted contribution_years auto-fits this, and an explicit one must satisfy current_age + contribution_years ≤ 80. Disclaimers + per-field hints under metadata. Payout methodology — Savvly vs market alone: the payout values are calculated by comparing two investors of the same age committing the same principal. Investor 1 invests in the market with the Savvly Longevity Benefit; Investor 2 invests in the market alone (no longevity overlay). To make the comparison apples-to-apples, at each milestone age (80, 85, 90, 95) Investor 2 withdraws from their market alone portfolio the same dollar amount Investor 1 receives as a payout from Savvly. The payout_market_alone_* and total_market_alone_* figures are therefore what Investor 2 can actually withdraw to match Savvly's payouts before running out — they fall to 0 once the market alone portfolio is depleted. The savvly_upside_* (and total_savvly_upside_*) fields quantify how much more total money Investor 1 receives in payouts from Savvly than Investor 2 is able to withdraw over time to match those payouts. DISCLOSURE REQUIRED: display disclosure.text verbatim and link disclosure.url to the user alongside any figures from this response. Required by SEC Marketing Rule and FINRA Rule 2210 — do not paraphrase or omit. VISUALIZATION: this tool emits an interactive chart widget (MCP Apps — see _meta.ui) that the HOST renders inline and editable; other clients render only your text and show no chart. That widget is the canonical chart for these numbers: do NOT draw, generate, or re-render a duplicate of it. You MAY still create your OWN, DIFFERENT visualization (e.g. a table or an alternate breakdown) and place it wherever you judge best — only the MCP App widget's position is constrained. Do NOT claim or imply a chart is visible (avoid 'the chart above shows…'); you cannot tell whether the host rendered the widget. Summarize the key figures in prose and show the disclosure text and link, and reference the widget only conditionally (e.g. 'if your client shows the interactive chart, its fields are editable to re-run the projection'). ORDER: BEFORE you call this tool, ALWAYS write at least one short lead-in paragraph (1-3 sentences) framing what the projection will show — do NOT invent specific figures you do not have yet. On hosts that render the widget inline at the tool call, this keeps your text ahead of the chart so the widget is never the first thing shown; THEN call the tool (this lead-in is framing, NOT asking the user for inputs — still call it in the same turn without waiting) and give the grounded figures + disclosure after it returns. This lead-in rule applies to the MCP App widget only; any visualization you create yourself may appear wherever you judge best. INPUTS: every parameter is OPTIONAL and defaults to a sensible value. Call this tool IMMEDIATELY — pass only the values the user explicitly stated and omit the rest. Do NOT ask the user for starting values, assumptions, or missing parameters before calling; the rendered widget has editable fields so they adjust age, amounts, and other assumptions inline after it appears.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
current_ageNoInvestor's current age (default 40). Min 18 (the projection matrix floor); max 75 (max enrollment age)
average_returnNoExpected average annual S&P 500 return % (default 8)
monthly_amountNoMonthly deposit in USD (default 100)
withdrawal_ageNoEarly-withdrawal age (default 82) — drives `early_withdrawal_value` and `total_payout_at_withdrawal_age_*` in the response
contribution_yearsNoNumber of years contributing. Omit to use a sensible default of min(27, 80 − current_age) — 27 for the canonical age-40 scenario, and always small enough that contributions finish by age 80 (the advisor limit). If you pass an explicit value, current_age + contribution_years must be ≤ 80.
installment_increase_percentageNoOptional annual % increase applied to monthly contributions

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
inputsYesEcho of the validated input arguments passed to the tool.
resultYesRaw projection envelope returned by the upstream estimator.
summaryYesConvenience summary including a human-readable narrative.
metadataYes
disclosureYesDISCLOSURE REQUIRED: display `disclosure.text` and link `disclosure.url` to the user whenever you present any number from this response. Required by SEC Marketing Rule and FINRA Rule 2210. The richer block under `metadata.disclaimer` is supplementary detail; this top-level field is the must-display.
visualizationNoRecommended chart for this projection — a grouped bar chart of the milestone payouts in `result.payout_age_dependent_values` (Savvly vs market alone). Render it when the surface can display a graph.
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already indicate readOnly and idempotent. The description adds extensive behavioral context: payout methodology (Savvly vs market alone comparison), disclosure requirements (SEC/FINRA rules), visualization behavior (MCP App widget vs text-only clients), and the meaning of _lower/_upper fields. No contradictions with annotations.

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?

The description is long but well-structured: purpose, output, methodology, disclosure, visualization, ordering, inputs. It front-loads the essential purpose. While verbosity is justified by complexity, it could be tightened without losing clarity. Not excessively verbose, but not maximally concise.

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 the tool's complexity (6 optional parameters, no required, output schema exists), the description covers every relevant aspect: what it does, how to use it, what the output means, disclosure, visualization, ordering, and parameter defaults. It leaves no significant gaps for an AI agent to infer incorrectly.

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 covers all 6 parameters with descriptions (100% coverage), so baseline is 3. The description adds value by explaining constraints and defaults beyond schema: e.g., 'Contributions must finish by age 80...', 'omitted contribution_years auto-fits this', 'every parameter is OPTIONAL and defaults to a sensible value.' This contextual enrichment justifies a 4.

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 clear, specific verb+resource: 'Retirement projection for monthly contributions to the Savvly Longevity Benefit over a number of years.' It explicitly states the output includes payout amounts at milestone ages with Savvly vs market comparisons, distinguishing it from sibling lump-sum tool by name and content.

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?

The description provides explicit when-to-use context: 'Suitable for retirement savings planning, annuity alternative comparison, and longevity benefit illustration.' It includes ordering instructions (lead-in paragraph before call, call immediately), visualization rules, and how to handle output ranges and disclosure. The guidance is comprehensive and actionable.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/Savvly/savvly-mcp'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server