Moltline TaxLots

Form 8949 Rows

form_8949_rows

Read-onlyIdempotent

Lay the disposals out as Form 8949 rows with box categories and totals. PREMIUM (license).

Typical input {"disposals": , "tax_year": 2026, "default_reporting": "proceeds_only"} returns {"part_i": {"B": [rows]}, "part_ii": {"E": [rows]}, "totals": {...}}. Columns follow the form: description (a), date acquired (b), date sold (c), proceeds (d), cost or other basis (e), code (f), adjustment (g), gain or loss (h). Box: A/D when the broker reported proceeds and basis, B/E when proceeds only, C/F when no broker form - set per row in reporting {row_id: value} or for all rows with default_reporting. Use to draft the schedule from computed disposals. Not a filing: check the current form instructions. Errors: on invalid, missing, or malformed input this tool never raises a protocol error; it returns {"error": ""} (for example {"error": "disposals must be a non-empty list from build_lots"}). Every call is read-only and idempotent, so after correcting the input it is always safe to retry.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "disposals": "<disposals>",
      "tax_year": "<tax_year>"
    },
    "name": "form_8949_rows"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`tax_year`	Yes	the calendar year of the disposals to include.
`disposals`	Yes	rows from build_lots.
`reporting`	No	per-row override: proceeds_and_basis, proceeds_only or none.
`whole_dollars`	No	round each row to whole dollars as the form permits.
`default_reporting`	No	proceeds_and_basis, proceeds_only or none (default).	none

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedSep 6, 2026

TDQS

A4.4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false, while the description adds useful context: premium licensing, not a filing, and a non-protocol error object with safe retry after correction. The main behavioral profile is well covered, though it does not discuss auth or rate concerns.

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?

The description is front-loaded with the core purpose, then gives an example, column mapping, box rules, and error behavior. It is longer than a minimal definition but appropriately structured for a complex tax-form tool; the length is mostly earned.

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?

Although an output schema exists, the description still provides a return-shape example and explains the error object. For a five-parameter tool with nested objects and tax-form-specific box logic, it supplies enough context for correct invocation.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3, but the description adds meaning beyond the schema by explaining box mapping (A/D, B/E, C/F) and the Form 8949 column sequence. It also clarifies how reporting and default_reporting affect per-row classification.

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: laying disposals out as Form 8949 rows with box categories and totals. It also distinguishes the tool's role by tying its input to build_lots and computed disposals, so an agent can tell it is downstream of lot-building rather than a substitute.

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 clearly says to use the tool to draft the schedule from computed disposals and names build_lots as the source of input. It does not spell out when not to use it or contrast it with other sibling tools, but the intended usage context is clear.

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

All Moltline TaxLots 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.