Skip to main content
Glama

reference-data

by dev.afriref

compute_income_tax

PAID ($0.05). Statutory income tax on a TAXABLE-income figure using the country's verified marginal bracket schedule, with full per-bracket workings, effective rate and marginal rate. Handles inflation-indexed tax units (Colombia UVT, Chile UTA, Peru UIT, Uruguay BPC) — you pass local currency. IMPORTANT: this is tax on taxable income, NOT net take-home pay — reliefs/allowances and social-security contributions are the caller's concern and are not applied (see the response scope_note). Pass api_key if you have one; otherwise the response explains how to pay via x402.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
api_keyNoAPI key (bypasses x402; metered for invoicing)
countryYesISO country code
taxable_incomeYesTaxable income in the country's local currency, in the schedule's own period basis (annual for most; monthly for Côte d'Ivoire, Uganda, Ethiopia, Costa Rica)

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description fully discloses behavioral traits: a cost of $0.05, the use of a verified bracket schedule, handling of indexed units, exclusion of reliefs and social security, and the api_key/x402 payment mechanism. This is comprehensive and leaves no major ambiguity.

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 a single paragraph that is information-dense but not excessively long. It front-loads the essential purpose and cost. Some structure (e.g., bullet points or separate sentences) could improve readability, but overall it communicates efficiently.

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?

Given the complexity of tax computation across many countries, the description covers key aspects: what it computes, what it excludes, unit handling, and payment method. It hints at output (full workings, effective rate) and mentions a scope_note. The lack of an output schema is somewhat mitigated by the description's detail.

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?

Although the schema already provides full descriptions for all three parameters (100% coverage), the description adds valuable context: it specifies that taxable_income is in local currency and notes the per-period basis (annual except for specific countries). This enriches the meaning 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?

The description clearly states that the tool computes statutory income tax on a taxable income figure using a verified marginal bracket schedule. It specifies the handling of inflation-indexed tax units and explicitly distinguishes from net take-home pay, which helps differentiate it from sibling tools like compute_payroll.

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 provides clear context on what the tool does and does not do (e.g., not net pay, no reliefs/allowances). It also explains the api_key payment bypass and x402 alternative. However, it does not explicitly compare to sibling tools like compute_payroll, which might be used for net pay.

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

All reference-data toolsInspect
Try in Browser
RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Disambiguation5/5

Each of the 11 tools addresses a clearly distinct operation: compliance checking, income tax, payroll, VAT, working days, holidays, series queries (current/history/snapshot/catalog), and settlement date. Even within the tax and calendar families, the descriptions precisely delineate boundaries, so there is no realistic risk of an agent selecting the wrong tool.

Naming Consistency4/5

The vast majority of tools follow a consistent verb_noun snake_case pattern (check_, compute_, get_, list_, count_). The only deviation is settlement_date, which is a noun phrase rather than verb_noun, but it is still clear and idiomatic. This single outlier prevents a perfect score.

Tool Count5/5

With 11 tools, the server is well-scoped for a reference-data domain covering statutory rates, calculations, calendars, and settlement conventions. Each tool has a distinct purpose and earns its place; the count is neither thin nor bloated.

Completeness4/5

The server provides strong coverage of its stated domain: statutory tax computations, payroll, minimum wage, VAT, holidays, working days, and settlement dates, plus a generic series API for extensibility. Minor gaps exist, such as payroll only supporting Nigeria and Kenya and no standalone social-security contributor, but the response descriptions explicitly disclose these limits, and the generic series endpoint provides a workaround for common lookups.

Resources