Epics Deals — US LLC & Tax Tools

Compare LLC States — fees, approval times and annual costs side by side

compare_llc_states

Read-onlyIdempotent

Compare 2–3 US states for LLC formation: all-in formation cost, state approval time, annual report/tax cost, and why founders pick each. Use for 'Wyoming vs Delaware', 'which state is best/cheapest for a non-resident LLC', and similar comparisons.

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": {
      "states": "<states>"
    },
    "name": "compare_llc_states"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`states`	Yes	2–3 US state names or codes to compare

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedNov 9, 2026

TDQS

A4.2/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already cover the safety profile (readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive, closed-world), so the bar is lower, and the description still adds value by disclosing the comparison dimensions returned. With no output schema, describing the returned fields (cost, approval time, annual cost, rationale) is meaningful disclosure. It does not state data freshness or whether figures are estimates, which would matter for legal/financial comparisons.

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?

One sentence covering scope, compared dimensions, and use cases, followed by example queries. Front-loaded with the verb and resource; no filler, and every clause contributes scope or routing information.

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 one-parameter, read-only lookup tool with full annotation coverage, this is nearly everything an agent needs: what is compared, how many states, and typical user phrasings. The only gap is the absence of any note on data currency or authoritative sourcing for fee/time figures.

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% and the single 'states' parameter already documents the 2–3 min/max array constraint. The description restates '2–3 US states' and shows example state values, adding only marginal meaning beyond the schema. 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?

States a specific verb (Compare) and resource (2–3 US states for LLC formation), then enumerates exactly what is compared: all-in formation cost, approval time, annual report/tax cost, and reasons founders pick each. An agent can distinguish this from llc_cost_calculator (single-state cost) without opening either schema.

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?

Gives concrete trigger phrases ('Wyoming vs Delaware', 'which state is best/cheapest for a non-resident LLC') that map user phrasing to the tool, which is strong positive guidance. It stops short of naming alternatives or exclusions, e.g. it never says to use llc_cost_calculator instead when only one state is involved.

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

All Epics Deals — US LLC & Tax Tools 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?