Lintelly HR Deutschland

Minijob: Stunden, Grenze und Kosten

minijob

Read-onlyIdempotent

Mini-job check under German law (Minijob, geringfügige Beschäftigung, § 8 SGB IV) for 2026 and 2027: maximum hours under the monthly earnings limit, minimum wage check (Mindestlohn), annual limit including one-off payments, and the employer's flat-rate contributions and levies (Pauschalabgaben) for the years whose rates are published. Use it before hiring a mini-jobber or changing hours or pay. Germany only.

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`jahr`	No	Year, default the current year
`stunden`	No	Planned working hours, leave out to get only the maximum hours
`stunden_je`	No	Whether the hours are per week or per month, default week
`stundenlohn`	Yes	Gross hourly wage in euros
`pauschsteuer`	No	True (default) for the usual 2 % flat-rate tax
`einmalzahlungen_jahr`	No	Promised one-off payments in the year in euros, e.g. Christmas bonus
`gesetzlich_krankenversichert`	No	True (default) if the person has statutory health insurance; then the employer pays the health flat rate (Pauschale zur Krankenversicherung)
`unter_18_ohne_berufsabschluss`	No	True if the person is under 18 without vocational qualification; then the minimum wage does not apply (§ 22 Abs. 2 MiLoG)

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 / gesetzlich_krankenversichert / description

Previous value: -"True (default) if the person has statutory health insurance; then the employer pays the 13 % health flat rate"New value: +"True (default) if the person has statutory health insurance; then the employer pays the health flat rate (Pauschale zur Krankenversicherung)"

removedInput schema / properties / jahr / enum
```
Removed value: -[
-  "2026",
-  "2027"
-]
```
addedInput schema / properties / jahr / maximum
```
Added value: +2027
```
addedInput schema / properties / jahr / minimum
```
Added value: +2026
```

changedInput schema / properties / jahr / type

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

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

A4.3/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already establish that this is a read-only, idempotent, non-destructive, non-open-world check. The description adds useful behavioral context by limiting coverage to 2026/2027 and to 'the years whose rates are published,' and by restricting applicability to Germany. It does not contradict any 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 purpose is front-loaded in the first phrase, followed by the concrete checks, the usage timing, and the geographic scope. The description is dense but not padded; every sentence contributes scope or usage guidance.

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?

For an eight-parameter legal check with a full output schema and complete schema descriptions, the description provides enough context: jurisdiction, covered years, covered calculations, and when to use it. Return-value details are correctly left to the output schema, and safety behavior is covered by annotations.

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 parameter is already documented in the input schema. The description supplies high-level context such as annual limits including one-off payments and employer flat-rate contributions, but it does not add parameter-level meaning beyond what the schema already provides.

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 states a specific verb and resource: a mini-job check under German law (§ 8 SGB IV) covering maximum hours, minimum wage, annual limit, and employer flat-rate contributions. It distinguishes the tool from general wage or cost checks by explicitly scoping it to Minijob / geringfügige Beschäftigung and by naming the relevant years and country.

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?

It gives a clear usage moment: 'Use it before hiring a mini-jobber or changing hours or pay.' It also adds a geographic exclusion with 'Germany only,' which is a useful when-not condition. It does not explicitly point to sibling alternatives such as mindestlohn_check, so it falls short of the top score.

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.