Skip to main content
Glama

tax-retirement

by io.github.herve-coulon
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

fiscal_ifi

Read-onlyIdempotent

Impôt sur la fortune immobilière (IFI) — IFI dû à partir du patrimoine immobilier taxable : limitation des dettes (art. 974, patrimoine > 5 M€), barème progressif (art. 977, seuil d'assujettissement 1,3 M€ mais barème dès 800 k€), décote (base 1,3–1,4 M€). Le plafonnement art. 979 (IFI + IR + PS ≤ 75 % des revenus) est appliqué SEULEMENT si revenu_foyer et autres_impots_annuels sont fournis — sinon l'IFI est rendu avant plafonnement et plafonnement_979 vaut "non_calcule" (montant non définitif). Version stateless : la base et les dettes sont des entrées (aucune lecture de dossier). (sources: CGI art. 964 (seuil 1,3 M€) ; CGI art. 977 (barème + décote) ; CGI art. 974 (limitation des dettes) ; CGI art. 979 (plafonnement 75 %))

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
dettesNoDettes déductibles rattachées à l'immobilier taxable (€). La limitation art. 974 s'applique au-delà de 5 M€ de patrimoine.
revenu_foyerNoRevenus du foyer de l'année (€). Fourni → déclenche le plafonnement art. 979. Absent → IFI rendu avant plafonnement.
residence_principaleNoValeur VÉNALE de la résidence principale (€), à ne PAS inclure dans patrimoine_immobilier_taxable : l'abattement de 30 % (art. 973 I CGI) est appliqué par le calcul.
autres_impots_annuelsNoIR + prélèvements sociaux + CEHR déjà dus au titre de l'année (€), pour le calcul du plafonnement art. 979. Ignoré si revenu_foyer absent.
patrimoine_immobilier_taxableYesValeur du patrimoine immobilier taxable BRUT (avant dettes) entrant dans l'assiette IFI (€) — résidence principale après abattement 30 %, biens locatifs, SCPI part immobilière, etc.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / residence_principale
      Added value: +{
+  "default": 0,
+  "description": "Valeur VÉNALE de la résidence principale (€), à ne PAS inclure dans patrimoine_immobilier_taxable : l'abattement de 30 % (art. 973 I CGI) est appliqué par le calcul.",
+  "minimum": 0,
+  "type": "number"
+}
  2. Added

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the annotations (readOnlyHint/idempotentHint/openWorldHint), the description discloses rich behavioral traits: the conditional plafonnement logic, the 'non_calcule' output state and that the result is non-definitive without extra inputs, and that the tool is stateless with base/dettes as inputs and no file access.

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 front-loaded with the tool's identity and core rules, and every sentence carries real conditional logic. The trailing parenthetical list of four CGI sources is dense but justified for a legal-calculation tool; still it borders on verbose.

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 five-parameter tax calculator with no output schema, the description covers the calculation rules, the conditional branch, and the stateless input model, and even names the plafonnement_979 output field. It stops just short of fully enumerating the returned amounts.

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 coverage is 100% and each field already documents its unit, the art. 973/974 rules, and the interdependency (autres_impots_annuels ignored if revenu_foyer absent). The description largely restates this framework rather than adding syntax or format detail beyond the schema, so the baseline 3 holds.

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 verb and resource ('Impôt sur la fortune immobilière (IFI) — IFI dû à partir du patrimoine immobilier taxable') and enumerates exactly which rules it computes (art. 974, 977, décote, 979). It is unmistakable versus siblings like fiscal_impot_revenu or fiscal_prelevements_sociaux.

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 gives clear conditional context: the art. 979 plafonnement is applied ONLY when revenu_foyer and autres_impots_annuels are supplied, otherwise the IFI is returned uncapped and non-definitive. However, it never names alternative sibling tools or states when not to use this one, so it stops short of explicit routing guidance.

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

All tax-retirement toolsInspect
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