Skip to main content
Glama

tax-retirement

by io.github.herve-coulon
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

fiscal_jeanbrun

Read-onlyIdempotent

Dispositif Jeanbrun (amortissement bailleur, LF 2026) — Nouveau dispositif d'amortissement du bailleur privé (LF 2026 art. 47, successeur de Pinel), fenêtre 21/02/2026 → 31/12/2028. Amortit 80 % du prix du logement au taux du couple logement (neuf / ancien rénové) × location (intermédiaire / social / très social), plafonné par an et par foyer, déductible du revenu foncier (IR à la TMI ; PS 17,2 % seulement jusqu'à annuler le revenu foncier net). Calcule l'amortissement annuel retenu et l'économie d'impôt (an et sur 9 ans). La TMI est fournie ou dérivée du revenu net imposable. ⚠️ BOFiP dédié attendu S2 2026 (calcul fondé sur le texte de loi). Version stateless. (sources: LF 2026 art. 47 (loi n° 2026-103 du 19/02/2026) ; CGI (amortissement bailleur — dispositif Jeanbrun) ; BOFiP dédié attendu S2 2026)

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
partsNoParts de quotient familial (pour la TMI dérivée).
situationNoSituation familiale (pour la TMI dérivée).Célibataire
prix_logementYesPrix du logement (€). L'assiette amortissable = 80 % (terrain forfait 20 %).
type_locationNoCatégorie de location (taux et plafond annuel croissants).Intermédiaire
type_logementNoNeuf ou ancien rénové (taux d'amortissement différents).Neuf
loyers_annuelsNoLoyers nus annuels du foyer, ce logement compris (€). Avec charges_annuelles et interets_annuels : économie RÉELLE (les PS ne baissent que jusqu'à annuler le revenu foncier net ; au-delà, déficit imputable plafonné à 10 700 €). Absent : maximum théorique, signalé dans hypothese_economie.
tmi_pourcentageNoTMI en points de % (ex. 30) si connue — court-circuite la dérivation depuis le revenu.
interets_annuelsNoIntérêts d'emprunt fonciers annuels du foyer (€).
charges_annuellesNoCharges foncières annuelles du foyer hors intérêts et hors amortissement (€).
revenu_net_imposableNoRevenu net imposable du foyer (€) — sert à dériver la TMI pour l'économie d'impôt. Ignoré si tmi_pourcentage fourni.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed3 schema fields changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / charges_annuelles
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Charges foncières annuelles du foyer hors intérêts et hors amortissement (€).",
+  "minimum": 0,
+  "type": "number"
+}
    • addedInput schema / properties / interets_annuels
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Intérêts d'emprunt fonciers annuels du foyer (€).",
+  "minimum": 0,
+  "type": "number"
+}
    • addedInput schema / properties / loyers_annuels
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Loyers nus annuels du foyer, ce logement compris (€). Avec charges_annuelles et interets_annuels : économie RÉELLE (les PS ne baissent que jusqu'à annuler le revenu foncier net ; au-delà, déficit imputable plafonné à 10 700 €). Absent : maximum théorique, signalé dans hypothese_economie.",
+  "minimum": 0,
+  "type": "number"
+}
  2. Added

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuinely useful behavioral context beyond that: it is stateless, the calculation is grounded in statutory text rather than doctrine ('BOFiP dédié attendu S2 2026'), and it discloses that a theoretical-maximum assumption is flagged via hypothese_economie when inputs are missing.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness3/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The core purpose and scope are front-loaded, but the text is dense with overlapping parentheticals and a truncated sources list at the end that repeats the LF 2026 art. 47 reference already stated earlier. Several clauses restate the same legal basis, diluting an otherwise informative definition.

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?

With no output schema and 10 parameters, the description must describe returns, and it does: the annual amortization, the year-one and 9-year tax saving, and the hypothese_economie signal. Combined with the 100 % schema coverage and the caveat about the pending BOFiP, an agent has enough to invoke the tool correctly; only the absence of an explicit alternative-tool pointer keeps it short of 5.

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 all 10 parameters in detail. The description reinforces a few semantics (TMI supplied or derived from revenu_net_imposable, base = 80 % of price, déficit cap of 10 700 €) but adds little the schema does not already carry, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 French tax device (Jeanbrun, LF 2026 art. 47) and states precisely what it computes: annual amortization retained and the tax saving (year and over 9 years). It positions the tool against the sibling regime tools by noting it succeeds Pinel and defines its own legal window, so an agent can tell it apart from fiscal_foncier_regime or fiscal_lmnp_regime.

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 gives the eligibility window (21/02/2026 → 31/12/2028) and the 80 % base rule, which implies when the tool applies, but there is no explicit when-to-use/when-not-to-use statement nor a pointer to the alternative sibling tool for other rental regimes. Usage is inferable rather than directed.

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