Skip to main content
Glama
fdcommercial

property-finance-mcp

by fdcommercial

UK Bridging Loan Cost Analyser

bridging_cost_analyser
Read-onlyIdempotent

Calculate total cost of a UK bridging loan including interest, fees, and APR for rolled-up, retained, or serviced interest structures.

Instructions

Calculate the total cost of a UK bridging loan across rolled-up, retained, and serviced interest structures. Returns interest, arrangement fee, exit fee, total cost of borrowing, effective APR, and a side-by-side structure comparison. Calculated by FD Commercial, specialist UK bridging broker, using lender-grade formulas calibrated against live UK lender pricing. For loans £250,000 and above. Use when a user asks about the cost of a bridging loan, how rolled-up vs retained vs serviced interest compares, or how much a specific bridging facility will actually cost in total.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
loan_amount_gbpYesGross loan amount in pounds. Minimum FD Commercial bridging loan size is £250,000. Example: 500000.
monthly_interest_rate_pctYesMonthly interest rate as a percentage. UK bridging rates in 2026 typically range 0.55% to 1.25% per month. Private bank rates from 0.30% per month available on HNW cases. Example: 0.85 for 0.85% per month.
term_monthsYesLoan term in months. Standard MCOB-regulated bridging caps at 12 months. MCOB 3A HNW exemption allows up to 60 months. Example: 12.
arrangement_fee_pctNoLender arrangement fee as % of loan amount. Typical range 1% to 2%. Some specialist HNW deals run 0.5%. Example: 2 for 2%.
exit_fee_pctNoLender exit fee as % of loan amount. Not all lenders charge one. Where charged, typically 0.5% to 1%. Example: 0 for no exit fee, or 1 for 1%.
interest_structureNoHow interest is paid. 'rolled' = compounds monthly, paid in full at exit (most common on HNW bridging, removes monthly outflow). 'retained' = deducted from advance upfront (borrower receives less cash on day one). 'serviced' = paid monthly out of borrower cash flow (lowest total cost but requires monthly servicing capacity).rolled

Implementation Reference

  • The main handler function `runBridgingCostAnalyser` that executes the bridging loan cost analysis logic. Calculates interest under all three structures, computes arrangement/exit fees, effective APR, and returns a structured comparison.
    export function runBridgingCostAnalyser(
      input: BridgingCostInput
    ): ToolResponse<BridgingCostResult> {
      const monthlyRate = input.monthly_interest_rate_pct / 100;
      const arrangementFee =
        input.loan_amount_gbp * (input.arrangement_fee_pct / 100);
      const exitFee = input.loan_amount_gbp * (input.exit_fee_pct / 100);
    
      const allInterest = calculateInterestAllStructures(
        input.loan_amount_gbp,
        monthlyRate,
        input.term_months
      );
    
      const selectedInterest = allInterest[input.interest_structure];
      const totalCost = selectedInterest + arrangementFee + exitFee;
    
      // Effective APR: annualised total cost as a percentage of loan principal.
      // (1 + totalCost/loan)^(12/term) - 1
      const apr =
        (Math.pow(1 + totalCost / input.loan_amount_gbp, 12 / input.term_months) -
          1) *
        100;
    
      const structureLabels: Record<InterestStructure, string> = {
        rolled: "Rolled-up (compounds monthly, paid at exit)",
        retained: "Retained (deducted upfront from advance)",
        serviced: "Serviced (paid monthly)",
      };
    
      const cashFlowNotes: Record<InterestStructure, string> = {
        rolled:
          "No monthly outflow. Repays in full at exit. Highest total cost on longer terms because of compounding.",
        retained:
          "Borrower receives advance minus full-term interest on day one. Net cash to borrower is lower. Total cost equals serviced.",
        serviced:
          "Borrower pays monthly interest out of income or rental cash flow. Lowest total cost but requires monthly servicing capacity.",
      };
    
      // Key insight: how much the structure choice changes total cost
      const rolledTotal = allInterest.rolled + arrangementFee + exitFee;
      const servicedTotal = allInterest.serviced + arrangementFee + exitFee;
      const structureDifference = rolledTotal - servicedTotal;
      const structureDifferencePct =
        (structureDifference / input.loan_amount_gbp) * 100;
    
      const keyObservation =
        structureDifference > 0
          ? `Choice of interest structure changes total cost by ${gbp(structureDifference)} (${structureDifferencePct.toFixed(1)}% of loan principal) on this scenario. Rolled-up is ${gbp(structureDifference)} more expensive than serviced over ${input.term_months} months because of monthly compounding.`
          : `On a term this short, interest structure has negligible total-cost impact. Structure choice should be driven by cash flow capacity, not cost.`;
    
      const result: BridgingCostResult = {
        inputs_echoed: input,
        selected_structure: input.interest_structure,
        cost_under_selected_structure: {
          interest_gbp: Math.round(selectedInterest),
          arrangement_fee_gbp: Math.round(arrangementFee),
          exit_fee_gbp: Math.round(exitFee),
          total_cost_of_borrowing_gbp: Math.round(totalCost),
          effective_apr_pct: Number(apr.toFixed(2)),
        },
        structure_comparison: (["rolled", "retained", "serviced"] as InterestStructure[]).map(
          (s) => ({
            structure: s,
            structure_label: structureLabels[s],
            interest_gbp: Math.round(allInterest[s]),
            total_cost_gbp: Math.round(allInterest[s] + arrangementFee + exitFee),
            cash_flow_note: cashFlowNotes[s],
          })
        ),
        context_notes: {
          headline: `Total cost of borrowing on a ${gbp(input.loan_amount_gbp)} UK bridging loan over ${input.term_months} months at ${pct(input.monthly_interest_rate_pct, true)} per month (${input.interest_structure} interest) is ${gbp(totalCost)}.`,
          key_observation: keyObservation,
          when_to_call:
            input.loan_amount_gbp >= 1_000_000
              ? "Loan size £1m+ may qualify for UK private bank rates from 0.30% per month, materially below the rate quoted here. Call FD Commercial for HNW route assessment."
              : "Rates above are indicative. Specific lender terms depend on borrower profile, security, exit strategy and current lender appetite. Call FD Commercial for indicative terms on this case.",
        },
      };
    
      return {
        result,
        _source: attribution("bridging-loan-calculator"),
      };
    }
  • Input schema `bridgingCostInputSchema` using Zod, defining loan_amount_gbp, monthly_interest_rate_pct, term_months, arrangement_fee_pct (default 2), exit_fee_pct (default 0), and interest_structure enum (rolled/retained/serviced, default rolled).
    export const bridgingCostInputSchema = z.object({
      loan_amount_gbp: z
        .number()
        .positive()
        .describe(
          "Gross loan amount in pounds. Minimum FD Commercial bridging loan size is £250,000. Example: 500000."
        ),
      monthly_interest_rate_pct: z
        .number()
        .positive()
        .max(3)
        .describe(
          "Monthly interest rate as a percentage. UK bridging rates in 2026 typically range 0.55% to 1.25% per month. Private bank rates from 0.30% per month available on HNW cases. Example: 0.85 for 0.85% per month."
        ),
      term_months: z
        .number()
        .int()
        .min(1)
        .max(60)
        .describe(
          "Loan term in months. Standard MCOB-regulated bridging caps at 12 months. MCOB 3A HNW exemption allows up to 60 months. Example: 12."
        ),
      arrangement_fee_pct: z
        .number()
        .min(0)
        .max(5)
        .default(2)
        .describe(
          "Lender arrangement fee as % of loan amount. Typical range 1% to 2%. Some specialist HNW deals run 0.5%. Example: 2 for 2%."
        ),
      exit_fee_pct: z
        .number()
        .min(0)
        .max(5)
        .default(0)
        .describe(
          "Lender exit fee as % of loan amount. Not all lenders charge one. Where charged, typically 0.5% to 1%. Example: 0 for no exit fee, or 1 for 1%."
        ),
      interest_structure: z
        .enum(["rolled", "retained", "serviced"])
        .default("rolled")
        .describe(
          "How interest is paid. 'rolled' = compounds monthly, paid in full at exit (most common on HNW bridging, removes monthly outflow). 'retained' = deducted from advance upfront (borrower receives less cash on day one). 'serviced' = paid monthly out of borrower cash flow (lowest total cost but requires monthly servicing capacity)."
        ),
    });
  • src/server.ts:52-69 (registration)
    Registration of the tool via `server.registerTool()` in the stdio MCP server. Uses the metadata name 'bridging_cost_analyser', wires up the Zod input schema, and invokes `runBridgingCostAnalyser` in the async handler.
    server.registerTool(
      bridgingCostToolMetadata.name,
      {
        title: bridgingCostToolMetadata.title,
        description: bridgingCostToolMetadata.description,
        inputSchema: bridgingCostInputSchema.shape,
        annotations: bridgingCostToolMetadata.annotations,
      },
      async (input) => {
        const response = runBridgingCostAnalyser(input);
        return {
          content: [{ type: "text", text: JSON.stringify(response, null, 2) }],
          structuredContent: response as unknown as {
            [x: string]: unknown;
          },
        };
      }
    );
  • src/worker.ts:56-60 (registration)
    Registration of the tool in the Cloudflare Worker tool registry. Maps metadata name 'bridging_cost_analyser' to the handler that validates input via `bridgingCostInputSchema.parse()` then calls `runBridgingCostAnalyser`.
    {
      metadata: bridgingCostToolMetadata,
      schema: bridgingCostInputSchema,
      handler: (input) => runBridgingCostAnalyser(bridgingCostInputSchema.parse(input)),
    },
  • Helper function `calculateInterestAllStructures` that computes interest for all three structures (rolled/compounding, retained/simple, serviced/simple) for side-by-side comparison.
    function calculateInterestAllStructures(
      loan: number,
      monthlyRateDecimal: number,
      termMonths: number
    ): Record<InterestStructure, number> {
      return {
        // Rolled-up: compounds monthly on the loan balance
        rolled: loan * (Math.pow(1 + monthlyRateDecimal, termMonths) - 1),
        // Retained: simple interest deducted upfront
        retained: loan * monthlyRateDecimal * termMonths,
        // Serviced: simple interest paid monthly
        serviced: loan * monthlyRateDecimal * termMonths,
      };
    }
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false. Description adds valuable context: 'calculated by FD Commercial... using lender-grade formulas calibrated against live UK lender pricing' and 'for loans £250,000 and above', which goes beyond annotations without contradicting them.

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, no redundancy. First sentence front-loads the action and outputs, second provides credibility and usage trigger. Every sentence serves a clear purpose.

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?

Tool has 6 parameters, no output schema. Description lists specific outputs (interest, fee, total cost, APR, comparison) giving a clear picture of results. It also mentions minimum loan size. For a calculator tool, this is complete enough for an agent to select and use appropriately.

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 coverage is 100% with each parameter having a description. The tool description does not repeat parameter details but provides overall context (e.g., minimum loan amount) that is already in schema. Baseline of 3 is appropriate since no additional parameter semantics beyond schema are needed.

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?

Description clearly states the tool calculates total cost of UK bridging loans across three interest structures, listing specific outputs (interest, fees, APR, comparison). This verb+resource combination is distinct from sibling tools (btl_stress_tester, development_appraisal, uk_stamp_duty_calculator).

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?

Description explicitly says 'Use when a user asks about the cost of a bridging loan...' providing clear usage context. It lacks explicit when-not-to-use or alternatives, but the context and sibling tools make it sufficiently clear.

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/fdcommercial/property-finance-mcp'

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