Suxession — French Inheritance Tax Engine

Exploration des optimisations (premium)

explorer_optimisations

Read-only

Résultats de l'optimiseur complet (premium, accès 99 €) : nécessite un accès actif déverrouillé via deverrouiller_acces. Retourne les stratégies d'optimisation complètes : leviers, montants, articles CGI, avertissements. La mise en place se finalise avec un notaire.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "code": "<code>",
      "situation": "<situation>"
    },
    "name": "explorer_optimisations"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`code`	Yes
`situation`	Yes	Sous-ensemble fiable du CalculRequest web (~30 sous-schemas → 8 champs). Cas simple uniquement : assurance-vie, donations, démembrement, SCI… → renvoi wizard.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed6 schema fields changedSep 30, 2026

removedInput schema / properties / situation / $ref
```
Removed value: -"#/$defs/SituationSimple"
```

addedInput schema / properties / situation / description

Added value: +"Sous-ensemble fiable du CalculRequest web (~30 sous-schemas → 8 champs).\nCas simple uniquement : assurance-vie, donations, démembrement, SCI… → renvoi wizard."

addedInput schema / properties / situation / properties

Added value: +{
+  "conjoint": {
+    "anyOf": [
+      {
+        "$ref": "#/$defs/ConjointMCP"
+      },
+      {
+        "type": "null"
+      }
+    ],
+    "default": null,
+    "description": "Requis si situation_conjugale est marie ou pacse (âge du conjoint)"
+  },
+  "enfants": {
+    "items": {
+      "$ref": "#/$defs/EnfantMCP"
+    },
+    "maxItems": 15,
+    "title": "Enfants",
+    "type": "array"
+  },
+  "option_conjoint": {
+    "anyOf": [
+      {
+        "enum": [
+          "usufruit_total",
+          "quart_pleine_propriete",
+          "quart_pp_trois_quart_us"
+        ],
+        "type": "string"
+      },
+      {
+        "type": "null"
+      }
+    ],
+    "default": null,
+    "description": "Uniquement pour marie — ignoré sinon",
+    "title": "Option Conjoint"
+  },
+  "parents_vivants": {
+    "anyOf": [
+      {
+        "enum": [
+          "deux",
+          "un",
+          "aucun"
+        ],
+        "type": "string"
+      },
+      {
+        "type": "null"
+      }
+    ],
+    "default": null,
+    "title": "Parents Vivants"
+  },
+  "passif": {
+    "default": 0,
+    "description": "Dettes déductibles en euros",
+    "minimum": 0,
+    "title": "Passif",
+    "type": "number"
+  },
+  "patrimoine": {
+    "description": "Actif brut total en euros (immobilier, mobilier, liquidités)",
+    "exclusiveMinimum": 0,
+    "maximum": 1000000000,
+    "title": "Patrimoine",
+    "type": "number"
+  },
+  "regime_matrimonial": {
+    "anyOf": [
+      {
+        "enum": [
+          "communaute_legale",
+          "separation_de_biens",
+          "participation_aux_acquets",
+          "communaute_universelle"
+        ],
+        "type": "string"
+      },
+      {
+        "type": "null"
+      }
+    ],
+    "default": null,
+    "description": "Uniquement pour marie/pacse — ignoré sinon",
+    "title": "Regime Matrimonial"
+  },
+  "situation_conjugale": {
+    "default": "celibataire",
+    "enum": [
+      "marie",
+      "pacse",
+      "concubin",
+      "celibataire",
+      "veuf",
+      "divorce"
+    ],
+    "title": "Situation Conjugale",
+    "type": "string"
+  }
+}

addedInput schema / properties / situation / required
```
Added value: +[
+  "patrimoine"
+]
```
addedInput schema / properties / situation / title
```
Added value: +"SituationSimple"
```
addedInput schema / properties / situation / type
```
Added value: +"object"
```

First observedSep 29, 2026

TDQS

A3.7/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotation readOnlyHint=true already marks this as a safe read. The description adds genuine behavioral context beyond that: a paid gating requirement (99 € premium), the unlock dependency, and the shape of the result set. It does not discuss latency, caching, or limits, but the auth/gating disclosure is the important behavioral fact here.

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?

Three short sentences, front-loaded with the deliverable, followed by the access precondition and the notary hand-off. No filler, though the paywall price is arguably incidental to tool selection.

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?

An output schema exists, so return details are covered structurally, and the description still adds the gating prerequisite and result categories. The unexplained 'code' parameter and the absence of explicit sibling comparison are the only real gaps for a tool with nested input and an output schema.

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 50%, and the nested situation object is well annotated in the schema itself. The description adds no parameter-level meaning and says nothing about the required 'code' parameter, which is undocumented in both the schema and the description. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 states a specific deliverable ('Résultats de l'optimiseur complet') and enumerates its contents (leviers, montants, articles CGI, avertissements), so the agent knows what comes back. It distinguishes itself from estimer_economie_optimisation by being the 'complete' optimizer, though it never names that sibling directly to make the contrast explicit.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

It names a hard precondition (active access unlocked via deverrouiller_acces) and a downstream step (finalization with a notary), which is real routing guidance. However, it never says when to prefer this over comparer_scenarios or estimer_economie_optimisation, so the choice among siblings is left to inference.

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

All Suxession — French Inheritance Tax Engine 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?