site

Exit proceeds calculator: completing before or after 6 April 2027

calculate

Run the Exit proceeds calculator: completing before or after 6 April 2027 calculator: Chargeable gain; Tax if the sale completes by 5 April 2027; Tax if it completes on or after 6 April 2027; Tax at the standard 24% rate with no relief. Missing inputs fall back to their documented defaults.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "calculate"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`fr`	No	Do you meet the Founders' Relief conditions (consultation draft)?	no
`badr`	No	Do you qualify for Business Asset Disposal Relief?	yes
`fees`	No	Adviser, broker and legal fees you pay on the sale
`price`	No	Sale price for your shares or your share of the business
`route`	No	Who are you selling to?	sale
`badrUsed`	No	Business Asset Disposal Relief lifetime limit already used
`basecost`	No	Base cost: what you originally paid for them
`completion`	No	When does the sale complete?	before

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed4 schema fields changedNov 7, 2026

changedInput schema / properties / badr / default
```
Previous value: -"1"New value: +"yes"
```

addedInput schema / properties / completion

Added value: +{
+  "default": "before",
+  "description": "When does the sale complete?",
+  "type": "string"
+}

addedInput schema / properties / fr

Added value: +{
+  "default": "no",
+  "description": "Do you meet the Founders' Relief conditions (consultation draft)?",
+  "type": "string"
+}

addedInput schema / properties / route

Added value: +{
+  "default": "sale",
+  "description": "Who are you selling to?",
+  "type": "string"
+}

First observedSep 6, 2026

TDQS

B3.3/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description must carry the full behavioral burden. It does disclose output structure and the default-fallback behavior for missing inputs, which is genuinely useful. It does not say whether the tool is a pure side-effect-free computation, which jurisdiction's tax rules apply beyond the date split, or whether results are illustrative estimates rather than filing-grade figures.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness3/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The definition is short and front-loaded, but the opening clause repeats the title nearly verbatim and stutters ("calculator: ... calculator:"), wasting the most prominent sentence. The semicolon-chained output list is dense but does convey the computed fields efficiently.

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?

For an eight-parameter, all-optional calculator with 100% schema coverage and no output schema, the description does the necessary work by naming the returned figures. It remains incomplete on the provenance and reliability of the calculation, which matters for a tax estimator an agent may relay to a user.

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 every one of the eight parameters is already documented, establishing a baseline of 3. The description only adds the default-fallback rule, which is largely restating the schema's default fields, and says nothing about the semantics of route, completion, or the fr/badr interaction.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb and resource ("Run the Exit proceeds calculator") and enumerates the computed outputs: chargeable gain, tax on each side of 6 April 2027, and the 24% no-relief rate. The purpose is discernible despite the awkwardly doubled "calculator: ... calculator:" construction. It gives no sibling differentiation, though the listed siblings are describe/fields/submit tools rather than competing computations.

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 only implied from the name and output list; there is no explicit "use this when..." statement, no exclusions, and no reference to calculator_describe as a way to learn the model's rules. The one useful usage note is that omitted inputs fall back to documented defaults, which tells the agent it may call with partial data.

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

All site 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.

Resources

Need Help?