reference-data

Statutory filing deadlines

get_filing_deadlines

Read-onlyIdempotent

PAID ($0.003, same as any series). Recurring statutory tax deadlines for a country — VAT/GST returns and payments, PAYE/payroll withholding remittances, corporate income tax returns and provisional/instalment payments — as RULES, each cited to the official source with the verbatim phrase that states it, plus the actual DUE DATES in a window, rolled for the country's weekend and national public holidays (every skipped day is listed). Where a rule's source does not say which way a weekend deadline moves, the date is flagged roll_unverified rather than guessed. Countries or taxes we could not verify are returned as a free coverage_gap with reasons, never invented. Pass year_end (MM-DD) to re-anchor corporate-tax rules on the company's own accounting year end. The HTML page /{country}/filing-deadlines shows the rules free. Every BR series is free to try. After a 200, bind get_changes (free poll) or register_alert (HMAC push; Register: $0 · Delivery after trial: $0.05) on this series so a later gazette does not silently retire the value.

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`to`	No	Window end, YYYY-MM-DD. Default from + 365 days; at most 400 days after from
`tax`	No	Only this tax's rules and dates
`from`	No	Window start, YYYY-MM-DD. Default today
`api_key`	No	API key (bypasses x402; metered for invoicing)
`country`	Yes	ISO country code
`year_end`	No	Company accounting year end, MM-DD (e.g. 06-30). Applies to rules marked year_end_variable

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description
`gaps`	No
`unit`	No
`error`	No	Present on a free refusal or error; no charge
`notes`	No
`stale`	No
`value`	No	The rules. Each carries its own source {name, url, anchor} and last_confirmed
`series`	No
`source`	No
`status`	No	On a coverage gap: researched_no_verified_rule or not_yet_researched
`country`	No
`due_dates`	No	Computed occurrences in the window, sorted by due_date
`no_charge`	No
`price_usd`	No
`confidence`	No
`disclaimer`	No
`how_to_pay`	No
`bind_series`	No
`explanation`	No
`label_basis`	No	Inputs and the rule ids that produced the two labels
`x_next_bind`	No
`coverage_gaps`	No	Taxes in scope with no verified rule for this country, and why
`http_endpoint`	No
`coverage_label`	No	How much of the question is covered: ready = complete; partial = held with a disclosed limitation or default; gap = no number served. Rules at /label-rules
`effective_from`	No
`last_confirmed`	No
`confidence_label`	No	Evidence verdict derived from source type, verification age and the stale flag (answers: the weakest series read). Rules at /label-rules
`payment_required`	No	true when the call needs payment; how_to_pay explains x402 or card
`computed_disclaimer`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed4 schema fields changedOct 17, 2026
- removedOutput schema / properties / label_basis / properties / source_type / anyOf
```
Removed value: -[
-  {
-    "type": "string"
-  },
-  {
-    "type": "null"
-  }
-]
```
- addedOutput schema / properties / label_basis / properties / source_type / type
```
Added value: +[
+  "string",
+  "null"
+]
```
- removedOutput schema / properties / label_basis / properties / verification_age_days / anyOf
```
Removed value: -[
-  {
-    "type": "number"
-  },
-  {
-    "type": "null"
-  }
-]
```
- addedOutput schema / properties / label_basis / properties / verification_age_days / type
```
Added value: +[
+  "number",
+  "null"
+]
```
AddedOct 13, 2026

TDQS

A4.6/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already declare read-only/idempotent/non-destructive, yet the description adds substantial behavior: paid metering ($0.003), weekend and public-holiday rolling with every skipped day listed, roll_unverified flagging instead of guessing, and coverage_gap returns rather than invented countries. That is exactly the value-add structured fields don't provide.

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?

It is front-loaded with pricing then purpose, and nearly every sentence carries a caveat, payment fact, or follow-up instruction. It runs long and includes some promotional framing ('same as any series', 'Every BR series is free to try') that an agent doesn't strictly need, keeping it from a 5.

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

Completeness5/5

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

For a six-parameter tool with an output schema, the description covers everything an agent needs: scope, coverage-gap semantics, unverified-date handling, year_end re-anchoring, pricing, and post-call follow-ups. Return-value shape is left to the output schema, which is correct.

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 the baseline is 3. The description goes further by explaining that year_end re-anchors corporate-tax rules on the company's own accounting year end and applies to rules marked year_end_variable, which is meaning beyond the terse schema string.

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 names a specific resource (recurring statutory tax deadlines for a country) and enumerates exactly what it returns: VAT/GST returns, PAYE remittances, CIT returns and instalment payments, as cited rules plus actual due dates. It also separates itself from the follow-up siblings get_changes and register_alert, so an agent can place it without opening a schema.

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?

It states the operating context clearly: pass year_end to re-anchor corporate-tax rules, use the free HTML page if you only want the rules, and bind get_changes or register_alert after a 200 so a later gazette doesn't silently retire the value. There is no explicit when-not/exclusion beyond the free-page pointer, so it falls just short of a 5.

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

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?