startup-valuation

Stakeholder & Equity Allocation

valuation_stakeholder

Read-onlyIdempotent

Split a known company valuation across stakeholders and equity classes using dilution, OPM, PWERM, or other cap table methods.

Instructions

Allocate value across stakeholders and equity classes: single-round dilution, OPM common stock, PWERM, liquidation value, M&A synergy, employee-option values, vesting adjustment, cash-vs-equity break-even, and asset-based loan capacity. Method selects the model. Use only after the company-level value is known (from valuation_core, valuation_saas, or valuation_comparables) to split that value across the cap table; for the company value itself do not use this tool. Parameters apply per method: dilution needs ownership_before + investment + post_money; opm needs enterprise_value + liquidation_pref + time_to_exit + volatility; pwerm and employee_option need scenarios; liquidation needs assets + recovery_rates; risk_adjusted_synergy needs revenue_synergies + cost_synergies; vesting_adjusted needs total_value + vested_fraction; max_asset_loan takes collateral values. Only method is required; all other parameters are method-dependent, so supply those the selected method names and omit the rest (defaults apply where defined). Rate and decimal inputs are fractions (0.10 = 10%); probability and weight lists are in [0,1] and sum to 1. Returns value, method, inputs, assumptions, chapter, formula_number and calculation steps; pure arithmetic — no I/O and no external calls — rounded to 2 decimals, with no auth or rate limits. An unknown method, or a missing method-required parameter, returns an error instead of a value.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`cash`	No	Cash and equivalents, currency units.
`years`	No	Forecast horizon in years; integer ≥ 1.
`assets`	No	Map of asset name to book value, e.g. {"cash": 500000}.
`method`	Yes	Formula to apply. Options: dilution = Ownership = before × (1 - investment / post-money).; opm = Option-pricing allocation of equity value to common shares.; pwerm = Probability-weighted expected return method across exit scenarios.; liquidation = V = Σ(asset × recovery rate).; risk_adjusted_synergy = Probability-weighted, discounted M&A revenue + cost synergies.; intrinsic_option = Intrinsic value = max(0, FMV - strike) × shares.; employee_option = Probability-weighted employee option value across scenarios.; vesting_adjusted = Option value adjusted for vesting schedule and retention probability.; cash_equity_breakeven = Break-even comparing salary reduction against discounted equity.; max_asset_loan = Borrowing capacity from asset collateral values.
`shares`	No	Number of option shares.
`tax_rate`	No	Effective tax rate as a decimal in [0,1].
`equipment`	No	Equipment, currency units.
`inventory`	No	Inventory, currency units.
`prob_cost`	No	Probability of realising cost synergies, 0-1.
`scenarios`	No	Scenario objects: {name: str, probability: 0-1, value: currency}; probabilities should sum to 1.
`investment`	No	Amount invested, currency units.
`post_money`	No	Post-money valuation, currency units.
`volatility`	No	Annualised volatility σ as a decimal (0.80 = 80%).
`real_estate`	No	Real estate, currency units.
`total_value`	No	Total grant value, currency units.
`equity_value`	No	Value of equity offered, currency units.
`prob_revenue`	No	Probability of realising revenue synergies, 0-1.
`strike_price`	No	Option strike price, currency units.
`time_to_exit`	No	Expected time to exit / liquidity in years.
`discount_rate`	No	Discount rate as a decimal (0.12 = 12%).
`cost_synergies`	No	Cost synergy value, currency units.
`recovery_rates`	No	Map of asset name to recovery rate in [0,1], matching assets.
`retention_prob`	No	Probability the holder stays, 0-1.
`vested_fraction`	No	Fraction vested in [0,1].
`years_remaining`	No	Years of vesting remaining.
`annual_vest_rate`	No	Annual vesting rate as a decimal.
`enterprise_value`	No	Enterprise value (market cap + net debt), currency units.
`liquidation_pref`	No	Liquidation preference amount, currency units.
`ownership_before`	No	Founder ownership before the round as a decimal (0.60 = 60%).
`salary_reduction`	No	Annual salary foregone for equity, currency units.
`fair_market_value`	No	Current fair market value per share, currency units.
`revenue_synergies`	No	Revenue synergy value, currency units.
`accounts_receivable`	No	Accounts receivable, currency units.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`error`	No	Error message when the call fails.
`steps`	No	Intermediate steps for traceability.
`value`	Yes	Computed valuation or metric.
`inputs`	No	Echo of the normalised inputs used.
`method`	No	Formula / method name that produced the result.
`chapter`	No	Source textbook chapter.
`assumptions`	No	Modelling assumptions applied.
`formula_number`	No	Source textbook formula number (e.g. '3.1').
`defaults_applied`	No	Optional parameters that were not supplied, so their documented defaults were used.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed3 schema fields changedv2.1.1Oct 2, 2026

changedInput schema / properties / tax_rate / description

Previous value: -"Effective tax rate as a decimal."New value: +"Effective tax rate as a decimal in [0,1]."

changedInput schema / properties / years / description

Previous value: -"Forecast horizon in years."New value: +"Forecast horizon in years; integer ≥ 1."

addedOutput schema / properties / defaults_applied

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Optional parameters that were not supplied, so their documented defaults were used.",
+  "items": {
+    "type": "string"
+  },
+  "type": "array"
+}

First observedv0.1.0Sep 30, 2026

TDQS

A4.8/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly/idempotent/non-destructive, but the description goes further: pure arithmetic with no I/O or external calls, results rounded to 2 decimals, no auth or rate limits, and deterministic error behavior for unknown methods or missing method-required parameters. That is meaningful behavioral disclosure beyond structured fields.

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 method list and per-method parameter map are front-loaded and dense, and every clause carries routing or invocation information about a 33-parameter tool. It is a long semicolon-chained sentence, but the length is largely justified by the surface area, with only minor density cost.

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?

For a broad multi-method calculator with 33 parameters and an output schema, the description covers selection, prerequisites, per-method inputs, unit conventions, error cases, and return fields. An agent has everything needed to invoke it correctly, and return-value detail is optional given the output schema.

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 adds real value by mapping each method to its required parameters (e.g. opm needs enterprise_value + liquidation_pref + time_to_exit + volatility) and stating unit conventions (fractions, probability lists in [0,1] summing to 1). It stops short of documenting every parameter/method pair, so it beats the baseline without being exhaustive.

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 (allocate value) and resource (stakeholders and equity classes), then enumerates the ten supported methods so the agent knows the exact scope. It also positions itself against siblings, making it clearly distinguishable from valuation_core and the vertical valuation tools.

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?

Gives an explicit when-to-use ('only after the company-level value is known') and names the three upstream tools that produce that value, plus an explicit when-not-to-use ('for the company value itself do not use this tool'). Nothing about routing is left to inference.

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

Deploy Server