DecisionsCalc calculators

us dependent care fsa vs credit

us_dependent_care_fsa_vs_credit

Read-onlyIdempotent

US, tax year 2026: whether a dependent care FSA (limit $7,500 a household, employer money included) or the child and dependent care credit (50% of up to $3,000 / $6,000 of care costs, phasing to 35% from $15,000 of AGI and to 20% above $75,000, $150,000 joint) saves more, and the FSA amount that saves the most. Federal tax on the 2026 tables with the standard deduction, payroll tax (FICA) and a flat state rate; the credit is limited to the federal tax owed and to the lower earner’s pay.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "status": "<status>",
      "income": "<income>",
      "kids": "<kids>",
      "expenses": "<expenses>"
    },
    "name": "us_dependent_care_fsa_vs_credit"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`kids`	Yes	Children in paid care: 1, or 2 for two or more
`income`	Yes	Household income before the FSA, USD
`status`	Yes	Filing status
`employer`	No	Employer FSA contributions, USD
`expenses`	Yes	Care costs for the year, USD
`fsaWages`	No	Pay of the person with the FSA (for payroll tax), USD
`planLimit`	No	Plan limit for your own contributions (default 7500)
`stateRate`	No	State income tax rate, percent
`lowerEarned`	No	Lower earner’s pay if married, or your pay, USD

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description
`next`	No	Optional paid follow-on (name, url, what) where it genuinely helps
`note`	No	When the figures were read, and that this is general information, not advice
`page`	Yes	The calculator page to cite or link, https://decisionscalc.com/...
`result`	Yes	The calculation (usually an object), same engine and figures as the calculator page
`sources`	Yes	Official source URLs for the figures used

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedNov 11, 2026

changedOutput schema / (root)

Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "properties": {
+    "next": {
+      "description": "Optional paid follow-on (name, url, what) where it genuinely helps",
+      "properties": {
+        "name": {
+          "type": "string"
+        },
+        "url": {
+          "type": "string"
+        },
+        "what": {
+          "type": "string"
+        }
+      },
+      "type": "object"
+    },
+    "note": {
+      "description": "When the figures were read, and that this is general information, not advice",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "page": {
+      "description": "The calculator page to cite or link, https://decisionscalc.com/...",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "result": {
+      "description": "The calculation (usually an object), same engine and figures as the calculator page"
+    },
+    "sources": {
+      "description": "Official source URLs for the figures used",
+      "items": {
+        "type": "string"
+      },
+      "type": "array"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "result",
+    "page",
+    "sources"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}

AddedNov 8, 2026

TDQS

A4.1/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare a safe, read-only, idempotent calculation. The description adds substantial behavioral context: it specifies the federal tax tables, standard deduction, FICA, flat state rate, and credit limitations (federal tax owed, lower earner’s pay), which helps the agent understand the computation model.

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 appropriately sized for a complex tax calculator and front-loads the core purpose. It is dense but not wasteful; a minor improvement would be splitting the single long sentence for readability.

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?

Given the complexity, the description covers the calculation basis and key limitations, and an output schema exists to explain return values. It does not detail all edge-case assumptions (e.g., other deductions, dependent eligibility), but it is sufficient for an agent to call the tool correctly.

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 description coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds real-world meaning beyond the schema: it clarifies the $7,500 household FSA limit, that employer money counts toward that limit, the credit phase-out thresholds tied to AGI, and the lower-earner limitation, which helps interpret parameters like planLimit, income, employer, and lowerEarned.

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 a specific comparison (dependent care FSA vs. child and dependent care credit) and that it returns the FSA amount that maximizes savings. It distinguishes from unrelated sibling financial calculators by scope and subject matter.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The scope (US, tax year 2026, dependent care) implies when the tool applies, but there is no explicit guidance on when to use it versus alternatives or when not to use it. No sibling tools are named or excluded.

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

All DecisionsCalc calculators tools Inspect

Try in Browser

One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.