Skip to main content
Glama

JobDoneBot

by io.github.acromoney888

Year-End Adjustment

year-end-adj-calc

Calculate refund or additional tax owed.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
hasSpouseNoHas spouse
annualBonusNoAnnual bonus in JPY
withheldTaxNoTax already withheld in JPY
annualSalaryYesAnnual salary in JPY
spouseIncomeNoSpouse income in JPY
hasHousingLoanNoHas housing loan
socialInsuranceNoSocial insurance premiums in JPY
housingLoanBalanceNoHousing loan balance in JPY
earthquakeInsuranceNoEarthquake insurance premium in JPY

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.

  1. Changed11 schema fields changed
    • addedInput schema / $schema
      Added value: +"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"
    • addedInput schema / properties / annualBonus
      Added value: +{
+  "default": 0,
+  "description": "Annual bonus in JPY",
+  "minimum": 0,
+  "type": "number"
+}
    • addedInput schema / properties / annualSalary
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Annual salary in JPY",
+  "minimum": 0,
+  "type": "number"
+}
    • addedInput schema / properties / earthquakeInsurance
      Added value: +{
+  "default": 0,
+  "description": "Earthquake insurance premium in JPY",
+  "minimum": 0,
+  "type": "number"
+}
    • addedInput schema / properties / hasHousingLoan
      Added value: +{
+  "default": false,
+  "description": "Has housing loan",
+  "type": "boolean"
+}
    • addedInput schema / properties / hasSpouse
      Added value: +{
+  "default": false,
+  "description": "Has spouse",
+  "type": "boolean"
+}
    • addedInput schema / properties / housingLoanBalance
      Added value: +{
+  "default": 0,
+  "description": "Housing loan balance in JPY",
+  "minimum": 0,
+  "type": "number"
+}
    • addedInput schema / properties / socialInsurance
      Added value: +{
+  "default": 0,
+  "description": "Social insurance premiums in JPY",
+  "minimum": 0,
+  "type": "number"
+}
    • addedInput schema / properties / spouseIncome
      Added value: +{
+  "default": 0,
+  "description": "Spouse income in JPY",
+  "minimum": 0,
+  "type": "number"
+}
    • addedInput schema / properties / withheldTax
      Added value: +{
+  "default": 0,
+  "description": "Tax already withheld in JPY",
+  "minimum": 0,
+  "type": "number"
+}
    • addedInput schema / required
      Added value: +[
+  "annualSalary"
+]
  2. First observed

TDQS

C2.9/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries full responsibility for behavioral disclosure, but it only states the outcome (refund/owed). It does not mention assumptions, limitations, tax rules, or that this is a pure calculation with no side effects.

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 a single concise sentence with no wasted words. It is front-loaded with the core purpose and avoids unnecessary content.

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

Completeness2/5

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

Given the high complexity (9 parameters), lack of annotations, and no output schema, the description is insufficient. It does not explain what year-end adjustment involves, how the parameters interact, or what output format to expect, leaving significant gaps.

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?

The input schema provides detailed descriptions for all 9 parameters, including units and defaults, so the schema already covers semantics at 100%. The description adds no additional parameter meaning, justifying the baseline score of 3.

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 clearly states the tool calculates a refund or additional tax owed, giving a specific verb and resource. However, it does not explicitly mention 'year-end adjustment' or differentiate from sibling tax tools like tax-return-calc or withholding-tax-calc.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

No contextual guidance is provided about when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description does not mention prerequisites, exclusions, or that this is specifically for year-end adjustment calculations.

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

All JobDoneBot toolsInspect
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

B3.1/5.0
Disambiguation2/5

Multiple tools have overlapping purposes, such as bg-remover, bg-remover-pro, pro-matting, and takumi all performing background removal, and upscaler/upscaler-pro being redundant. With 202 tools, an agent may easily select the wrong one despite detailed descriptions.

Naming Consistency4/5

Most tools use a consistent kebab-case format with descriptive names like pdf-compress, image-resizer, and tax-return-calc. Exceptions like 'takumi', 'pro-matting', and '-pro' suffixes (bg-remover-pro, upscaler-pro) are minor deviations relative to the total.

Tool Count1/5

202 tools is an extreme mismatch for an MCP server, far exceeding the typical 3-15 well-scoped range. The sheer volume makes it unwieldy for an agent to efficiently navigate and select the right tool.

Completeness4/5

The tool set provides extensive coverage across many domains, including PDF operations (20+ tools), image editing, financial calculations, e-commerce fee estimation, and YouTube utilities. Minor gaps exist in cross-tool integration, but the breadth is highly comprehensive for the apparent purpose.

Resources