Skip to main content
Glama

Arc & Ledger Tax Reference

by com.arcandledger

Check FBAR and FATCA obligations

check_fbar_fatca
Read-only

Use to screen general FBAR and Form 8938 thresholds from aggregate balance, filing status, residence, and account-count facts. Do not request account numbers, institution names, or statements.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
lives_abroadYesTrue if your tax home is outside the United States (higher Form 8938 thresholds apply).
account_countNoNumber of foreign accounts, if known.
filing_statusYesYour US tax filing status.
unfiled_yearsNoHow many past years of FBARs you have NOT filed but should have. 0 or omitted if current.
max_aggregate_foreign_balance_usdYesThe highest combined value of ALL your foreign financial accounts at any point during the year, in USD.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
relayYesInstruction to the calling assistant: relay figures and dates verbatim (identical on every response).
next_stepYesA single review link appropriate to this server surface.
disclaimerYesGeneral-information disclaimer (identical on every response).
source_urlYesOfficial IRS or FinCEN authority to review before relying on the result.
server_versionNoServer release that produced this response (matches GET /version).

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the tool is known to be safe and non-destructive. The description adds value by specifying the type of data to avoid requesting (account numbers, etc.), which is a behavioral constraint beyond the annotations. No contradictions.

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?

The description is only two sentences, no wasted words. It front-loads the purpose and includes a useful constraint. Every sentence earns its place.

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?

With 5 parameters, 100% schema coverage, and an output schema existing, the description covers the essential context: what inputs to provide and what to avoid. It does not need to explain outputs since the output schema handles that. Minor gap: no mention of potential limitations or edge cases, but still complete enough for this tool's complexity.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents all 5 parameters well. The description does not add new parameter-specific details but summarizes the key inputs (aggregate balance, filing status, residence, account-count). This adds minimal additional meaning beyond the schema, so score is baseline 3.

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 screens general FBAR and Form 8938 thresholds from specific facts. It uses a specific verb 'screen' and identifies the resource 'thresholds'. The sibling tools include other check tools, and this one is clearly distinct due to its focus on FBAR/FATCA.

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?

The description explicitly states when to use the tool (to screen thresholds from aggregate balance, filing status, residence, and account-count facts) and includes a negative guidance ('Do not request account numbers, institution names, or statements'). However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use it, which would elevate it to a 5.

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

All Arc & Ledger Tax Reference toolsInspect
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

A4.2/5.0
Disambiguation5/5

Each tool addresses a distinct tax topic or action, such as screening obligations, checking eligibility, estimating amounts, or explaining documents. There is no overlap in purpose, making it easy for an agent to select the correct tool.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tool names follow a consistent verb_noun or verb_phrase pattern (e.g., check_*, estimate_*, explain_*, decode_*, deadline_calendar). The naming is predictable and clear across the set.

Tool Count5/5

With 13 tools, the server covers a broad range of tax reference needs without being overwhelming. Each tool has a clear purpose and the count is well-suited for the domain.

Completeness4/5

The tools cover common tax reference tasks like screening obligations, estimating penalties, explaining forms, and checking deadlines. A minor gap is the lack of a general tax liability estimator, but overall the set is comprehensive for its stated purpose.

Resources