Skip to main content
Glama

reference-data

by dev.euroref
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

compute_employment_cost

PAID ($0.10). Cost to employ: prices every statutory contribution on both the employee and employer sides for a gross salary, returning line-by-line amounts with instrument citations and an explicit refused list for schemes that could not be priced (unknown, not zero). Does NOT compute income tax — use compute_payroll for gross-to-net take-home where supported. Pass api_key if you have one; otherwise the response explains how to pay via x402. Optional receipt (boolean, default false): on a paid success, include an Ed25519 answer receipt at no extra USDC. An answer receipt is not a series certified extract (GET /v1/certified/{country}/{series} is $0.25 and is not an MCP tool) and is not legal advice. Verify with verify_answer_receipt against /certified/public-key.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
grossYesGross pay in local currency
periodNoPeriod the gross covers (default month)
api_keyNoAPI key (bypasses x402; metered for invoicing)
countryYesISO country code with a costed contribution schedule
receiptNoDefault false. When true, a paid success includes an Ed25519 answer receipt (kind answer_receipt) at no extra USDC. Unpaid 402 and free refusals do not include one. Not a series certified extract (GET /v1/certified/{country}/{series} at $0.25; that SKU is not an MCP tool).
contractNoContract type where rates differ
nationalityNoGulf nationality for pension reach
subdivisionNoOptional ISO 3166-2 regional schedule (e.g. CA-QC, DE-SN)
childless_over_23NoGermany care surcharge
children_under_25NoGermany per-child care reduction
workplace_pensionNoAuto-enrolment / PPK participation (default true)
zusatzbeitrag_rateNoGermany sickness-fund supplement

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / receipt
      Added value: +{
+  "default": false,
+  "description": "Default false. When true, a paid success includes an Ed25519 answer receipt (kind answer_receipt) at no extra USDC. Unpaid 402 and free refusals do not include one. Not a series certified extract (GET /v1/certified/{country}/{series} at $0.25; that SKU is not an MCP tool).",
+  "type": "boolean"
+}
  2. Added

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does so thoroughly. It discloses the $0.10 paid nature, the refund/unknown handling ('explicit refused list... unknown, not zero'), the receipt behavior, the distinction from certified extracts, the 'not legal advice' caveat, and verification via verify_answer_receipt.

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 dense and front-loaded with the most important facts: cost, scope, output, and exclusions. It is long, but each sentence carries necessary operational or legal context for a paid tool; minor redundancy exists around receipt behavior.

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?

For a complex tool with 12 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description covers cost, payment flow, output contents, exclusions, receipt limitations, and verification. It could be more complete with examples or explicit country-specific behavior, but it is sufficient for an agent to call it correctly.

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 the schema already documents every parameter. The description adds some context around api_key ('otherwise the response explains how to pay via x402') and receipt semantics, but most parameter meaning is already well-covered in the input 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 states a specific verb and resource: it 'prices every statutory contribution on both the employee and employer sides for a gross salary, returning line-by-line amounts.' It also explicitly distinguishes itself from income tax computation, so an agent can differentiate it from compute_income_tax and compute_vat.

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 says what the tool does not do ('Does NOT compute income tax') and names compute_payroll as the alternative for gross-to-net take-home. It also gives payment guidance for api_key vs x402, but it does not contrast against compute_income_tax directly, and compute_payroll is not present in the sibling list.

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
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