Skip to main content
Glama

FalaZuki Finance BR

check_severance

Confere um TRCT (termo de rescisão) de empregado CLT verba a verba contra a conta canônica da rescisão, com as tabelas vigentes NA COMPETÊNCIA: saldo de salário, 13º e férias proporcionais (com os avos IMPRESSOS no documento, que mandam sobre a derivação por meses de casa), terço, aviso indenizado (ou trabalhado), multa do FGTS, INSS, IRRF e o líquido total. Cada verba informada recebe veredito (confere, confere com arredondamento, difere com o valor); verba não informada vira referência sem veredito. Recusas honestas: multa sem o saldo do FGTS é não conferível; remuneração variável (médias) recusa a conferência inteira; férias vencidas e outras verbas declaradas tiram o líquido total da comparação. Nunca inventa diferença. Parâmetros obrigatórios: salary, months_worked, type, reference_date. Opcionais: days_worked_in_month, dependents, notice_worked, thirteenth_twelfths, vacation_twelfths, fgts_balance, informed_salary_balance, informed_thirteenth, informed_vacation, informed_vacation_bonus, informed_notice_pay, informed_fgts_penalty, informed_inss, informed_irrf, informed_net_total, has_variable_pay, declared_items. Use exatamente estes nomes, em inglês.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
typeYesTipo de desligamento. with_cause é a dispensa por justa causa; fixed_term_end é o término do contrato a prazo na data combinada
salaryYesSalário bruto mensal fixo, em R$
dependentsNoDependentes para o IRRF
fgts_balanceNoSaldo do FGTS, em R$. Sem ele, a multa fica não conferível
informed_inssNoINSS descontado no TRCT, em R$
informed_irrfNoIRRF descontado no TRCT, em R$
months_workedYesMeses de casa (define os dias de aviso prévio)
notice_workedNoAviso prévio trabalhado: o TRCT não traz aviso indenizado
declared_itemsNoVerbas do TRCT que o motor não reconstrói: expired_vacation (férias vencidas), other
reference_dateYesData da rescisão (competência das tabelas), aaaa-mm-dd
has_variable_payNoRemuneração variável (comissões, HE habituais)? A conferência recusa: médias não são reconstruídas
informed_vacationNoFérias proporcionais no TRCT, em R$
vacation_twelfthsNoAvos das férias como impressos no TRCT; sem ele, derivado dos meses
informed_net_totalNoTotal líquido do TRCT, em R$
informed_notice_payNoAviso prévio indenizado no TRCT, em R$
informed_thirteenthNo13º proporcional no TRCT, em R$
thirteenth_twelfthsNoAvos do 13º como impressos no TRCT; sem ele, derivado dos meses
days_worked_in_monthNoDias trabalhados no mês da rescisão
informed_fgts_penaltyNoMulta do FGTS no TRCT, em R$
informed_salary_balanceNoSaldo de salário no TRCT, em R$
informed_vacation_bonusNoTerço constitucional no TRCT, em R$

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / type / description
      Previous value: -"Tipo de desligamento"New value: +"Tipo de desligamento. with_cause é a dispensa por justa causa; fixed_term_end é o término do contrato a prazo na data combinada"
    • changedInput schema / properties / type / enum
      Previous value: -[
      -  "without_cause",
      -  "resignation",
      -  "mutual_agreement"
      -]New value: +[
      +  "without_cause",
      +  "resignation",
      +  "mutual_agreement",
      +  "with_cause",
      +  "fixed_term_end"
      +]
  2. First observed

TDQS

A4.1/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden and does so well: it discloses per-line verdicts (confere, confere com arredondamento, difere com o valor), that uninformed items become reference-only without verdict, the honest-refusal rules, and the 'never invents a difference' guarantee. It stops short of describing the response structure or any auth/pagination aspects, but for a pure computation tool this is strong disclosure.

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?

Purpose and behavior are front-loaded in a dense but well-organized opening, with refusals and output semantics following. The trailing enumeration of all 21 parameter names is partly redundant with the schema, but the accompanying naming instruction earns its place. Slightly long overall.

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?

For a 21-parameter, no-annotation, no-output-schema tool, the definition covers what an agent needs: purpose, verdict semantics, refusal rules, and required vs optional inputs. Output format is described at the verdict level, which compensates for the missing output schema. Minor gap: no explicit routing to the sibling calculator.

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 coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents every parameter with meaning, including enums and defaults. The description adds the mandatory/optional grouping and the explicit instruction to use exact English names, which is useful but largely restates what is already structured. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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?

States a specific verb+resource: it checks (Confere) a TRCT line by line against the canonical severance account, using tables valid at the competency date. It is clearly distinguished from the sibling calculate_severance by being a verifier of an already-issued document rather than a calculator. An agent can tell exactly what this does without opening the schema.

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 gives clear context for when the tool applies and enumerates precise refusal conditions (multa without FGTS balance is non-checkable, variable pay refuses the whole check, expired vacation removes net total from comparison). It does not explicitly name calculate_severance as the alternative path, leaving the when-not-to-use-vs-sibling boundary to inference.

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

Try in Browser

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources