The Comp Desk Builder

NY weekly benefit rate (TTD, TPD, reduced earnings)

calculate_weekly_rate

Read-onlyIdempotent

A weekly benefit rate under the NY Workers' Compensation Law: kind "total" (temporary total: two-thirds of the AWW within the max and min for the date of accident; a wage below the minimum is paid in full), "partial" (temporary partial at a degree of disability, with the same bounds) or "reduced_earnings" (two-thirds of the wage loss, capped at the max, never raised to the min). New York State only. Computes with The Comp Desk calc-core (the engine behind the app, the website calculators and the Pro Workspace); it never estimates. If an input is missing it returns status "missing" with every input still needed and calculates nothing. Returns the figures, the rate year used, the formulas with their citations (each flagged with whether it has been attorney-reviewed), and the not-legal-advice notice. Needs your builder key. Same engine the Pro Workspace tiles call through CD.Calc, so a figure here matches the app to the cent.

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": {
      "kind": "<kind>",
      "aww": "<aww>",
      "date_of_accident": "<date_of_accident>"
    },
    "name": "calculate_weekly_rate"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`aww`	Yes	Average weekly wage before the injury, in dollars (gross).
`kind`	Yes
`date_of_accident`	Yes	Date of accident (injury), YYYY-MM-DD. Only a full date the user gave; never a guessed one.
`disability_percent`	No	kind "partial": degree of partial disability, 0–100 (50 means 50%).
`current_weekly_earnings`	No	kind "reduced_earnings": gross weekly earnings now, in dollars.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedNov 13, 2026

TDQS

A4.1/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Goes well beyond the readOnly/idempotent annotations: it discloses the authentication requirement ("Needs your builder key"), the deterministic non-estimating policy, the exact "missing" status contract with all still-needed inputs, and the full return payload including rate year and attorney-review flags. It also states cross-surface consistency with the app, which is real behavioral context an agent cannot get from structured fields.

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?

Front-loads the definition and kinds well, but the Comp Desk engine claim is made twice ("the engine behind the app, the website calculators and the Pro Workspace" and again "Same engine the Pro Workspace tiles call through CD.Calc... matches the app to the cent"), which is redundant promotional weight in an otherwise dense paragraph.

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?

No output schema exists, and the description does the right thing by enumerating what comes back: figures, rate year, formulas with citations and review flags, and the disclaimer. Combined with the missing-input contract and auth note, an agent has nearly everything needed; only the min/max sourcing and exact response shape are left to discovery.

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 80%, so the schema carries most parameter documentation, but it leaves the kind enum entirely undescribed; the description compensates by defining total, partial and reduced_earnings including min/max clamping behavior. It could still tie disability_percent and current_weekly_earnings more explicitly to their kinds, though the schema does that itself.

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 concrete resource (NY weekly benefit rate) and enumerates the three modes with the formula for each (two-thirds of AWW within max/min; partial at a degree of disability; two-thirds of wage loss capped at max). It is unmistakably a rate calculator, but it never names the adjacent siblings (get_max_min_rate, calculate_aww) it depends on, so differentiation is inferred rather than stated.

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?

Gives clear selection logic among the three kinds and a hard jurisdictional exclusion ("New York State only"), plus a behavioral rule for missing inputs. It stops short of saying when to reach for this versus the sibling rate/AWW calculators, which an agent must infer from names.

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

All The Comp Desk Builder 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?