Calculate technology plan financeability

What it's for

Answers the board-level question 'Can we still finance this technology plan if EBITDA weakens or funding closes—and exactly how much committed capital closes the gap?'

What you give it

Inputs split into evidence read from your connected systems, calibration your team owns, and numerical controls that affect precision but never the result's meaning.

{
  "available_contingent_capital": 80,
  "minimum_cash_buffer": 20,
  "scenarios": [
    {
      "committed_financing_inflows": [
        0,
        0
      ],
      "covenant_ebitda": [
        20,
        20
      ],
      "debt_draws": [
        0,
        0
      ],
      "debt_repayments": [
        0,
        0
      ],
      "id": "base",
      "operating_cash_flows": [
        10,
        10
      ],
      "probability": 0.6,
      "signal_id": "open",
      "technology_investment_cash_outflows": [
        10,
        10
      ]
    },
    {
      "committed_financing_inflows": [
        0,
        0
      ],
      "covenant_ebitda": [
        10,
        10
      ],
      "debt_draws": [
        0,

What you get back

This is the actual output of running the example above — computed by the same function the platform calls, not an illustration.

{
  "configuration": {
    "capital_confidence_level": 0.9,
    "maximum_acceptable_tail_funding_shortfall": null,
    "maximum_net_leverage": 3,
    "maximum_post_capital_breach_probability": 0.1,
    "minimum_cash_buffer": 20,
    "tail_probability": 0.4
  },
  "decision": "technology_plan_financeability_supported",
  "failed_gates": [],
  "guardrails": [
    "All cash, debt, investment, financing and EBITDA paths must be aligned joint scenarios on one entity, consolidation, currency, period, tax and accounting basis. Committed financing excludes debt draws represented separately.",
    "Required upfront capital is the smallest period-zero unrestricted cash injection that satisfies the encoded cash buffer and net-leverage ceiling in each path. It is not a financing commitment, solvency opinion, covenant waiver or guarantee that capital is available.",
    "Scenario probabilities, cash buffer, EBITDA definition and covenant interpretation require treasury, finance and legal ownership. Technology activity cannot be converted into EBITDA or enterprise value by the agent."
  ],
  "method": "coherent_cash_debt_ebitda_technology_plan_financeability_v1",
  "period_breach_diagnostics": [
    {
      "period": 1,
      "probability_baseline_cumulative_breach": 0.4,
      "probability_post_capital_cumulative_breach": 0
    },
    {
      "period": 2,
      "probability_baseline_cumulative_breach": 0.4,
      "probability_post_capital_cumulative_breach": 0
    }
  ],
  "scenario_diagnostics": [
    {
      "first_baseline_breach_period": 1,
      "maximum_baseline_net_leverage": 11,
      "minimum_baseline_cash": -30,
      "post_capital_financeable": true,
      "probability": 0.4,
      "required_upfront_contingent_capital": 80,
      "residual_funding_shortfall": 0,
      "scenario_id": "stress"
    },
    {
      "first_baseline_breach_period": null,
      "maximum_baseline_net_leverage": 1.5,
      "minimum_baseline_cash": 50,

How it works

Decision analysis — Turn uncertainty, cost and risk appetite into a defensible choice, with the reasoning left inspectable.

1. 1 Freeze one common-scenario set containing operating cash, technology cash outflow, committed non-debt financing, debt draws/repayments and covenant EBITDA at every period.
2. 2 Roll cash and debt forward jointly, calculate liquidity and net leverage, and solve analytically for the smallest period-zero unrestricted cash injection satisfying both constraints throughout each path.
3. 3 Aggregate baseline and post-capital breach probabilities, confidence capital, expected and tail residual shortfall, period breach curves and severe-scenario diagnostics under governed gates.

Before you trust it

Every tool in the catalog ships with the conditions under which its answer is meaningful — and the conditions under which it should abstain instead of guessing.

Calibrating it to your org

Calibration workflow

1. 1 Define the management decision, target outcome, aggregate unit, privacy boundary, cadence, and prediction/intervention horizon for this organization.
2. 2 Build a tenant-scoped historical cohort using only information available before each prediction or decision; preserve zero periods, censoring, assignment probabilities, and unresolved outcomes when the method requires them.
3. 3 Estimate statistical parameters on training history, but obtain costs, utilities, risk tolerance, practical-effect thresholds, capacity, and policy constraints from accountable decision owners.
4. 4 Validate on later time windows or held-out aggregate units at the deployment grain, against a simple baseline and the function-specific validation strategy.
5. 5 Deploy only if the returned decision clears evidence, overlap, calibration, robustness, and guardrail checks; warning, unsupported, schema-gap, and fallback decisions are abstentions.
6. 6 Monitor realized outcomes, data drift, coverage, and decision regret; recalibrate at a governed cadence or after a detected regime/definition change, never merely because a stakeholder dislikes the result.

Call it from your AI

You don't wire up 388 tools in your MCP client. The GitRevio MCP server exposes 18 tools, three of which let an agent search the catalog, read a tool's schema, and run it — so the assistant finds this one on its own.

gitrevio_capabilities_search
  { "q": "calculate whether a technology plan remains" }
  → finds "calculate_technology_plan_financeability"

gitrevio_capability_describe
  { "capability_id": "calculate_technology_plan_financeability" }
  → returns the input schema and agent guidance shown on this page

gitrevio_capability_run
  { "capability_id": "calculate_technology_plan_financeability", "arguments": { ... } }
  → returns the result shown above

Works in Claude Desktop, Claude Code, Cursor, Cline, Continue.dev, Goose and Aider. See the MCP server.

Related tools

See every tool in Finance & unit economics →