french-rental-compliance

Assistant maternel (assmat) end of contract — retrait d'enfant, démission, préavis, indemnité (CCN 3239)

calculate_assistant_maternel_end_of_contract

Read-only

End of an assistant maternel (assmat) contract with a parent-employer: retrait d'enfant or resignation, notice, indemnity, Pajemploi documents, for the parent or the assistant maternel. · Fin de contrat d'assistant maternel (assmat) avec un parent employeur : retrait d'enfant ou démission, préavis, indemnité de rupture, documents Pajemploi, pour le parent comme pour l'assistant maternel. — Same engine as calculate_home_employment_end_of_contract with regime pre-set to assistant_maternel (socle spécifique): notice by length of care (art. 120: 8 days / 15 days / 1 month, outside the trial period), withdrawal indemnity (art. 121.1: 1/80 of gross salaries excluding entretien/repas/km, from 9 months of care), rupture conventionnelle NOT available (CASF L.423-2), last Pajemploi declaration, 6-month settlement contest window, documents with who produces and who receives each. NOT for a garde d'enfant à domicile (nounou at the family's home) — that is regime garde_domicile on the generic tool. Applies the Convention collective IDCC 3239 (verified on Légifrance 2026). Deterministic formulas — no AI, no assessment of any person or motif.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`party`	Yes	Who is asking: 'employer' (particulier employeur) or 'employee' (salarié / assistant maternel). Wording only — the figures are identical for both.
`as_of_date`	No	Seniority reference date when the letter has not been sent yet (planning). Ignored when notification_date is given.
`end_reason`	Yes	Closed category matching the letter: 'employer_termination' (licenciement / retrait d'enfant), 'resignation' (démission), 'mutual_termination' (rupture conventionnelle — not available for assistants maternels).
`start_date`	Yes	Contract start (ISO).
`am_monthly_gross`	No	Assistant maternel: monthly gross (mensualisation), EXCLUDING indemnités d'entretien, repas, kilométriques.
`notification_date`	No	ISO date of the FIRST PRESENTATION (or handover) of the letter that ends the contract — the notice runs from it. For a rupture conventionnelle: the signature date. Omit for durations only.
`serious_misconduct`	No	The letter states faute grave or faute lourde (a category chosen by the user — the tool does not assess it). Removes the notice and the indemnity by rule.
`am_total_gross_paid`	No	Assistant maternel: optional total gross salaries paid since the start (art. 121.1 base). Defaults to mensualisation × complete months.

TDQS

A4.8/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, but the description goes well beyond structured data: it states the calculation is deterministic ('no AI, no assessment of any person or motif'), advances the applicable convention (IDCC 3239 verified on Légifrance 2026), and discloses the non-availability of rupture conventionnelle. This prevents misuse of a network tool as a legal judgment or open-ended approximation tool.

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 front-loaded with the purpose and immediately names the sibling tool. The legal version is lengthy, but each segment adds a needed constraint or discloses an exclusion, and the French duplicate serves the bilingual domain. Overall it is longer than the bare minimum but well-structured and not redundant from an informational perspective.

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 legal calculator with 8 parameters and no output schema, the description is unusually complete: it covers scope, excluding modality, output-like elements (last Pajemploi declaration, docs and who receives/provides, contest window), legal formula, and alternative routing to the generic tool. An agent has all signs needed to choose the tool and understand the result shape.

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?

With 100% schema description coverage, the baseline is 3, but the description adds meaningful legal and calculation context: it names the 1/80 rule based on gross salaries excluding entretien/repas/km, the 8/15-day/1-month notice thresholds under article 120, and the 9-month care condition. This helps the agent understand how params like am_total_gross_paid and start_date will drive the computation.

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 clearly states the tool's verb and resource: it calculates end-of-contract outcomes for an assistant maternel with a parent-employer (retrait d'enfant, démission, préavis, indemnité, Pajemploi documents). It also differentiates itself from the sibling generic tool by name: 'Same engine as calculate_home_employment_end_of_contract with regime pre-set to assistant_maternel.'

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 is explicit about when to use this tool versus alternatives: it names the generic sibling calculate_home_employment_end_of_contract, and explains that a 'garde d'enfant à domicile' should go to the generic tool with regime garde_domicile. It also excludes 'rupture conventionnelle NOT available', giving clear selection criteria.

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

All french-rental-compliance tools Inspect

Try in Browser

RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A4.4/5.0

Disambiguation4/5

Each tool is tied to a specific legal or payroll calculation, and the names clearly indicate their target: salary, rent revision, tenant notice, DPE restrictions, quasi-resident status, zone-tendue lookup, family allowances, and health insurance. Some overlap exists because rent revision and DPE checks both involve F/G rent freezes, and tenant notice relies on zone-tendue data, but descriptions keep boundaries clear.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tool names follow the same snake_case verb_noun pattern with a concise legal/domain object. The verbs vary by nature of action—calculate_, check_, compare_—but each is consistent and semantically meaningful.

Tool Count5/5

Eight tools is a well-scoped number for a specialist compliance server. Each tool handles a distinct calculation or legal lookup, and none feels redundant or purely decorative.

Completeness4/5

The set covers the main rental-revision, tenant-notice, DPE-restriction, zone-tendue, and cross-border worker salary/benefit comparisons well. Minor gaps remain around related compliance details such as rental deposits, landlord-side termination, or deeper Swiss tax filing checks, but they are not fatal to the tool set’s stated purpose.

Resources

Need Help?