Lintelly HR Deutschland

Abfindung nach Faustformel

abfindung_faustformel

Read-onlyIdempotent

Rule-of-thumb severance pay under German law (Abfindung, § 1a KSchG): monthly pay × factor × years of service, with the usual range of factors and the legal cap if a court dissolves the employment (§ 10 KSchG). There is usually no legal right to severance; use it to size an offer or a settlement. Germany only.

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`alter`	No	Age at leaving in whole years, only for the legal cap
`faktor`	No	Monthly salaries per year of service, default 0.5 (statutory value), commonly up to 1.0
`austritt`	Yes	Last day of employment (YYYY-MM-DD)
`eintritt`	Yes	First day of employment (YYYY-MM-DD)
`kleinbetrieb`	No	True for a small business with regularly 10 or fewer full-time employees (part-time counted pro rata)
`zugang_kuendigung`	No	Day the notice of termination was received; the 6-month waiting period of the KSchG counts to this day (YYYY-MM-DD)
`monatsgehalt_brutto`	Yes	Gross monthly salary incl. regular allowances, in euros
`sonderzahlungen_jahr`	No	Annual one-off payments such as Christmas or holiday bonus, in euros; added with 1/12

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description
`stand`	Yes
`fallen`	No
`hinweis`	Yes
`quellen`	Yes
`ergebnis`	Yes	Result of the tool; its fields differ per tool
`rechenweg`	No
`herausgeber`	Yes
`naechster_schritt`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed6 schema fields changedOct 31, 2026

changedInput schema / properties / alter / description

Previous value: -"Age at leaving in years, only for the legal cap"New value: +"Age at leaving in whole years, only for the legal cap"

changedInput schema / properties / alter / type

Previous value: -"number"New value: +"integer"

addedInput schema / properties / austritt / format
```
Added value: +"date"
```
addedInput schema / properties / eintritt / format
```
Added value: +"date"
```
addedInput schema / properties / zugang_kuendigung / format
```
Added value: +"date"
```

changedOutput schema / (root)

Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "properties": {
+    "ergebnis": {
+      "description": "Result of the tool; its fields differ per tool"
+    },
+    "fallen": {
+      "items": {
+        "type": "string"
+      },
+      "type": "array"
+    },
+    "herausgeber": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "hinweis": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "naechster_schritt": {
+      "items": {
+        "type": "string"
+      },
+      "type": "array"
+    },
+    "quellen": {
+      "items": {
+        "properties": {
+          "geprueft_am": {
+            "type": [
+              "string",
+              "null"
+            ]
+          },
+          "grund": {
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "norm": {
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "status": {
+            "enum": [
+              "bestätigt",
+              "noch nicht bestätigt",
+              "Prüfung überfällig"
+            ],
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "url": {
+            "type": [
+              "string",
+              "null"
+            ]
+          }
+        },
+        "required": [
+          "norm"
+        ],
+        "type": "object"
+      },
+      "type": "array"
+    },
+    "rechenweg": {
+      "items": {
+        "type": "string"
+      },
+      "type": "array"
+    },
+    "stand": {
+      "type": "string"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "ergebnis",
+    "quellen",
+    "hinweis",
+    "stand",
+    "herausgeber"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}

First observedOct 23, 2026

TDQS

A4.2/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive and closed-world, so safety is covered. The description adds genuinely useful domain behavior: the statutory cap under § 10 KSchG and the § 1a KSchG basis, plus the jurisdictional limit.

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?

Three tight sentences: formula basis, legal caveat, and jurisdiction. Front-loaded with the core definition; only the parenthetical statutory citations add slight density.

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

Completeness5/5

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

Output schema exists and all parameters are documented, so return values need no explanation. The description supplies the legal framing an agent needs to present results responsibly for a Germany-only severance estimate.

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 all eight parameters are already documented. The description adds only light context — that factors fall in a 'usual range' and the cap depends on age — without syntax or default detail 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?

States a specific verb and resource — computing rule-of-thumb severance pay (Abfindung) under § 1a KSchG — and even gives the formula (monthly pay × factor × years). No sibling tool covers severance calculation, and the description makes that unique role obvious.

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?

Explicitly names the intended use cases (sizing an offer or a settlement) and flags the key caveat that there is usually no legal right to severance. It scopes to Germany only. No named alternative tool is offered, but none exists in this sibling set.

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

All Lintelly HR Deutschland 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.