Delegum

calcular_plan_pensiones

Read-only

Calcula el ahorro fiscal anual por aportar a un plan de pensiones privado y proyecta el capital acumulado hasta la jubilación. Aplica los límites 2025 (máx. 1.500 € individual + 8.500 € empresarial deducibles) y avisa de la tributación del rescate como rendimiento del trabajo.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`edad_actual`	Yes	Edad actual del partícipe
`capital_actual`	No	Capital ya acumulado en el plan, en euros. Por defecto 0.
`edad_jubilacion`	No	Edad prevista de jubilación. Por defecto 67.
`rendimientos_netos`	Yes	Rendimientos netos anuales del trabajo y actividades económicas, en euros (base del tipo marginal y del límite del 30%)
`rentabilidad_anual`	No	Rentabilidad anual esperada del plan en %. Por defecto 4.
`aportacion_individual`	Yes	Aportación individual anual al plan, en euros (límite deducible 1.500 €)
`aportacion_empresarial`	No	Aportación de la empresa al plan del trabajador, en euros/año (límite adicional 8.500 €). Por defecto 0.

TDQS

A4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations provide readOnlyHint=true, confirming it's a read-only calculation. The description adds important context: applies 2025 limits, warns about withdrawal taxation (rendimiento del trabajo). 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?

Two sentences, concise and front-loaded with the main purpose. Every sentence adds value without redundancy.

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 high schema coverage and clear description, the tool is well-specified. No output schema, but description hints at two outputs (ahorro fiscal, capital proyectado) and a warning. Slight gap in detailing output structure, but overall sufficient.

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 each parameter. The description adds overall context but does not enhance per-parameter meaning beyond 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 it calculates annual tax savings and projects accumulated capital for a private pension plan. It specifies applying 2025 limits and warns about withdrawal taxation, distinguishing it from sibling pension-related tools like calcular_jubilacion_anticipada.

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?

Usage is implied (for pension plan fiscal calculations), but no explicit guidance on when to use vs. alternatives or when not to use. No mention of 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 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

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

Need Help?