Skip to main content
Glama

reference-data

by dev.asiaref

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

A3.7/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description must carry the full burden. It discloses the cost ($0.05), payment via api_key or x402, and the method (marginal bracket schedule). It does not mention rate limits, error handling, or auth requirements beyond api_key. The behavioral disclosure is adequate but not exhaustive.

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 well-structured, leading with cost, then the main function, caveats, and payment info. Every sentence adds value, though the list of example tax units (Colombia UVT, etc.) could be slightly trimmed. Overall, it is efficient and front-loaded.

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

Completeness3/5

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

Given the tool's complexity (28 countries, marginal brackets, inflation-indexed units) and the absence of an output schema, the description covers key aspects: what it computes, what it excludes, and payment. However, it does not describe the exact output structure or error behavior, which limits completeness for an agent.

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% with good descriptions for each parameter. The description adds value beyond schema by explaining the api_key's role in bypassing x402, the need to pass local currency, and the context of inflation-indexed tax units. This additional context justifies a score above the baseline of 3.

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?

The description clearly states it computes statutory income tax on taxable income using marginal brackets. It specifies the scope (taxable income, not net pay) and mentions handling specific tax units. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like compute_vat beyond the tool name.

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 explicitly warns that the tool computes tax on taxable income, not net take-home pay, and that reliefs/allowances/social-security are the caller's concern. It also specifies handling of inflation-indexed tax units and passing local currency. It does not compare directly with alternatives but provides clear context for appropriate use.

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

A4.1/5.0
Disambiguation5/5

Each tool targets a distinct reference-data query: minimum wage check, income tax computation, VAT breakdown, working days, public holidays, series current/history/snapshot/catalog, and settlement date. There is no overlap; even get_series and get_series_history are explicitly separated as current vs. historical values.

Naming Consistency4/5

Most tools follow a clear verb_noun pattern (check_, compute_, count_, get_, list_). The one outlier is settlement_date, which is a noun phrase rather than verb_noun, but the deviation is minor and does not cause confusion.

Tool Count5/5

With 10 tools, the set is well-scoped for a reference-data server covering tax, labor, calendars, and settlement. Each tool serves a distinct purpose and none feel redundant or unnecessary.

Completeness4/5

The server provides strong coverage: discovery via list_series, current and historical series values, a bulk snapshot, and domain-specific computations for minimum wage, income tax, VAT, working days, holidays, and settlement dates. Minor gaps exist (e.g., no direct tool for social security contributions), but the core reference-data workflows are well supported.

Resources