Skip to main content
Glama

Delegum

by com.delegum

calcular_pension_incapacidad

Read-only

Calcula la prestación por incapacidad permanente (parcial, total, absoluta o gran invalidez): base reguladora, porcentaje aplicado, recargo por edad ≥55 años en la incapacidad total y complemento de gran invalidez. La IP parcial se abona como indemnización a tanto alzado; el resto, como pensión mensual.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
edadYesEdad del beneficiario en años (relevante para el recargo del 20% en IP total con ≥55 años)
tiene_conyugeNo¿Tiene cónyuge a cargo? Afecta a la pensión mínima garantizada. Por defecto false.
grado_incapacidadYesGrado de incapacidad permanente declarado
origen_contingenciaYes"comun" = enfermedad común o accidente no laboral. "profesional" = accidente de trabajo o enfermedad profesional.
suma_bases_cotizacionYesSuma de las bases de cotización del período de referencia (€). Comunes: últimas 112 mensualidades (8 años). Profesionales: últimas 12 mensualidades.
ultima_base_cotizacionNoÚltima base de cotización mensual (€). Necesaria para el complemento de gran invalidez.

TDQS

A4.1/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations provide readOnlyHint=true, and the description confirms a calculation (no mutation). It adds detail on what is computed (base reguladora, percentage, recargo, complemento) and payment method differences, enhancing transparency beyond the annotation.

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 concise: two sentences cover the core functionality and a key behavioral nuance. No unnecessary words, properly front-loaded with the main action.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the tool's complexity (6 parameters, no output schema), the description provides a useful overview but lacks details on calculation specifics (e.g., percentages by grade, exact formula). It is adequate for basic understanding but could be more complete.

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 coverage, the description adds value by explaining key logic: the recargo for age ≥55 in total disability (relating to 'edad'), and the lump sum vs monthly pension distinction (relating to 'grado_incapacidad'). This context is not in the schema.

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 calculates permanent disability pensions for all grades (parcial, total, absoluta, gran invalidez), listing key components (base reguladora, percentage, recargo, complemento). It also distinguishes between lump sum for partial and monthly pension for others, setting it apart from sibling tools like 'calcular_pension_publica'.

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 description implies usage for calculating permanent disability pensions but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'calcular_pension_publica' or 'calcular_pension_viudedad'. No guidance on prerequisites or exclusions.

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

All Delegum 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

A3.9/5.0
Disambiguation3/5

There are many tools with overlapping domains (e.g., multiple retirement calculators, home buying calculators), but detailed descriptions and explicit guidance on when to use comprehensive vs. specific tools help clarify. However, the sheer number (49) still creates potential confusion for an agent.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tools follow a consistent convention: infinitive verb or noun prefix (calcular, comparar, consulta) followed by descriptive noun phrase in snake_case. No mixed styles or irregularities.

Tool Count3/5

49 tools is high but justifiable given the broad scope of Spanish financial/legal calculations. It leans toward the heavy side but remains within a manageable range for a comprehensive server.

Completeness4/5

The tool set covers a wide spectrum of personal finance: income, taxes, housing, inheritance, self-employment, investments, etc. Only minor gaps exist (e.g., no separate tool for rental income beyond the alquiler tools, but included in IRPF).

Resources