Skip to main content
Glama

Sachbezugswerte

hr_sachbezugswerte
Read-onlyIdempotent

Nur Deutschland. Amtliche Sachbezugswerte nach § 2 SvEV für ein Kalenderjahr ab 2015: Verpflegung und Unterkunft je Monat, Tag und Mahlzeit (Frühstück, Mittag- und Abendessen). English: Official values for free meals and accommodation per month, day and meal.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
jahrNoKalenderjahr. Ohne Angabe gilt das laufende Jahr.
datumNoAlternativ zu jahr: Stichtag im Format JJJJ-MM-TT, das Jahr wird daraus genommen.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • removedInput schema / properties / datum / pattern
      Removed value: -"^\\d{4}-\\d{2}-\\d{2}$"
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -{
      -  "additionalProperties": true,
      -  "properties": {
      -    "abendessen_monat": {
      -      "description": "Abendessen je Monat (Dezimal)"
      -    },
      -    "datensatz": {
      -      "description": "Kennung des Datensatzes (Text)"
      -    },
      -    "datenstand": {
      -      "description": "Kennung des Datenstands: Datum und laufende Nummer der letzten Änderung im Änderungsprotokoll (/v1/aenderungen), die diesen Datensatz betrifft. Gleicher Datenstand heißt unveränderter Inhalt, praktisch für Prüfer und zum Vergleich zweier Abfragen (Text)"
      -    },
      -    "fruehstueck_monat": {
      -      "description": "Frühstück je Monat (Dezimal)"
      -    },
      -    "fruehstueck_tag": {
      -      "description": "Frühstück je Kalendertag (Dezimal)"
      -    },
      -    "gueltig_ab": {
      -      "description": "Beginn der Gültigkeit des Werts (Datum)"
      -    },
      -    "gueltig_bis": {
      -      "description": "Ende der Gültigkeit, null solange kein Nachfolger feststeht (Datum oder null)"
      -    },
      -    "hinweise": {
      -      "description": "Grenzen der Werte oder der Berechnung, in Sätzen (Liste)"
      -    },
      -    "jahr": {
      -      "description": "Kalenderjahr (Ganzzahl)"
      -    },
      -    "lizenz": {
      -      "description": "Nutzungsbedingungen der Werte (Text)"
      -    },
      -    "mittag_abend_tag": {
      -      "description": "Mittag- oder Abendessen je Kalendertag (Dezimal)"
      -    },
      -    "mittagessen_monat": {
      -      "description": "Mittagessen je Monat (Dezimal)"
      -    },
      -    "quelle": {
      -      "description": "Titel und URL der Primärquelle (Objekt)"
      -    },
      -    "rechtsgrundlage": {
      -      "description": "Gesetz oder Verordnung (Text)"
      -    },
      -    "stand": {
      -      "description": "Tag der letzten Prüfung gegen die Quelle (Datum)"
      -    },
      -    "unterkunft_monat": {
      -      "description": "Unterkunft je Monat (Dezimal)"
      -    },
      -    "unterkunft_tag": {
      -      "description": "Unterkunft je Kalendertag (Dezimal)"
      -    },
      -    "verpflegung_monat": {
      -      "description": "Verpflegung gesamt je Monat (Dezimal)"
      -    },
      -    "zitat": {
      -      "description": "Fertiger Satz mit Wert, Gültigkeit, Rechtsgrundlage und Quelle zum Zitieren (Text)"
      -    }
      -  },
      -  "type": "object"
      -}New value: +null
  2. First observed

TDQS

A3.9/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already mark the tool as read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds useful context about legal basis and output granularity, but it does not describe the return shape or default-year behavior, which is a minor gap given the annotations.

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 compact and front-loaded with the most important scope constraint ('Nur Deutschland'). The English translation repeats the German content and is not strictly necessary, but it does not make the description bloated.

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 read-only lookup with two optional parameters and no output schema, the description conveys the domain, legal source, time range, and output granularity. Default behavior is left to the schema, which is acceptable.

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?

Both parameters are fully documented in the schema with types, ranges, format, and default behavior, so schema coverage is 100%. The description does not add parameter-specific details beyond what the schema already provides, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 provides official German Sachbezugswerte under § 2 SvEV for a calendar year from 2015, covering meals and accommodation per month, day, and meal. This goes well beyond the title and distinguishes it from sibling HR value tools by naming the specific legal basis, domain, and granularity.

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 gives clear applicability context: Germany only, official values under SvEV, and years from 2015 onward. It does not explicitly name alternatives or when-not conditions, but the scope is specific enough for an agent to recognize when this tool is relevant.

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

Try in Browser

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.