reference-data

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

Name	Required	Description
`api_key`	No	API key (bypasses x402; metered for invoicing)
`country`	Yes	ISO country code
`taxable_income`	Yes	Taxable 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

A4.4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Without annotations, the description carries full burden. It discloses the tool is paid ($0.05), handles inflation-indexed tax units, and clarifies the scope (not net take-home pay). It also mentions response includes scope_note and explains api_key usage. Could be improved by stating failure modes, but overall sufficient.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is concise (a few sentences) and front-loaded with cost and purpose. Every sentence adds essential information without fluff. Well-structured for quick parsing.

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 without output schema, the description covers key aspects: cost, scope, response details (per-bracket workings, effective rate, marginal rate, scope_note), and indexed unit handling. Minor gaps like missing return format are acceptable given no output schema.

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 baseline is 3. The description adds value by explaining that taxable_income should be in local currency and in the schedule's period basis, and clarifies api_key bypasses x402. This context goes beyond the schema descriptions.

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 the tool computes statutory income tax on taxable income using marginal bracket schedules, including per-bracket workings. It specifies the resource (income tax) and verb (compute) implicitly. The tool is distinct from siblings like check_minimum_wage and compute_vat, as it focuses on income tax calculation.

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 explains when to use the tool (for computing income tax on taxable income) and what it does NOT cover (reliefs, allowances, social-security contributions). It also mentions the payment mechanism via api_key or x402. However, it does not explicitly contrast with sibling tools like compute_vat, relying on context.

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

All reference-data tools Inspect

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

A4.4/5.0

Disambiguation5/5

Each tool targets a distinct operation: compliance check, tax computation, VAT breakdown, day counting, holiday retrieval, series value/history/snapshot, catalog listing, and settlement date calculation. Even where underlying data overlaps (e.g., minimum wage as a series), the outputs and use cases are clearly differentiated.

Naming Consistency4/5

Nine of ten tools follow a clear verb_noun pattern (check_minimum_wage, compute_income_tax, compute_vat, count_working_days, get_public_holidays, get_series, get_series_history, get_snapshot, list_series). The outlier is settlement_date, which uses a noun phrase rather than a verb-based name, though it remains unambiguous and readable.

Tool Count5/5

With 10 tools, the server is well-scoped for its reference-data purpose, covering tax, wages, holidays, working days, series discovery, and settlement dates. Each tool earns its place without redundancy or bloat.

Completeness5/5

The surface provides comprehensive coverage: discovery via list_series, current/historical data via get_series and get_series_history, a full snapshot, tax computations, wage compliance, public holidays, working day counts, and settlement date calculations. There are no obvious gaps or dead ends for the intended domain.

Resources

Need Help?