Suxession — French Inheritance Tax Engine

Simulation des droits de succession

simuler_droits_succession

Read-only

Calcule les droits de succession français (cas simple) : patrimoine, conjoint, enfants, régime matrimonial. Réponse : droits par héritier + articles CGI de référence + liens guide. Gratuit, sans compte.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`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

TableJSON 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?

Annotations only declare readOnlyHint=true; the description adds genuinely new behavioral context ('Gratuit, sans compte') that tells the agent no auth/account is needed, plus it discloses the response content (droits par héritier, articles CGI, liens guide). It does not discuss limits or failure modes beyond the 'cas simple' scoping.

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 clauses, front-loaded with the core computation before the input list and output summary. Nothing is wasted, though the input enumeration is partly redundant with the schema.

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?

Given a nested-object schema, an output schema, and readOnly annotations, the description covers the essentials: what it computes, scope limitation, no-account access, and output shape. The main residual gap is the absence of explicit guidance on when to prefer it over sibling tools like comparer_scenarios.

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 field including which situation_conjugale values make conjoint/option_conjoint relevant. The description only recaps a few field names without adding format or interaction detail, so baseline 3 applies.

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?

Clear verb+resource: 'Calcule les droits de succession français (cas simple)' names the exact computation and scopes it. It lists the main inputs (patrimoine, conjoint, enfants, régime matrimonial). However it does not name or distinguish itself from any sibling tool, so sibling routing still requires inference.

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?

The '(cas simple)' qualifier implies a boundary, and the nested schema description routes complex cases (assurance-vie, donations, démembrement, SCI) to a wizard, but the top-level description states no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use condition and does not point at any sibling alternative.

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?