Skip to main content
Glama

日本の給与・社会保険・労働法

by io.github.kishida-devil

年間の労務コスト — 賞与の上限を年度で通した額

calculate_annual_cost

What one employee costs an employer over a year, bonuses included.

Reach for this rather than multiplying a payslip by twelve, because the two do not agree once a bonus is paid. 健康保険法第45条 caps the standard bonus cumulatively across the year — 5,730,000 from 1 April to 31 March — so the same bonus costs a different amount depending on where it falls, and once the year is used up later bonuses carry no health premium. 厚生年金保険法第24条の4 caps at 1,500,000 per payment with no yearly total, so pension keeps charging where health has stopped.

Pass bonuses in the order they are paid: the health allowance fills from the first one. Each row comes back with what was counted, whether it was cut, and how much of the year remains, so the answer can be explained rather than just quoted.

Income tax here is the monthly figure times twelve. Bonus withholding is a separate calculation (calculate_bonus with include_tax) and the year-end adjustment is a separate tool (calculate_year_end_adjustment) — say so rather than presenting this as take-home pay for the year.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
ageNoEither this or birth_date is required.
bonusesNoEach bonus in yen, in the order paid. The health cap fills from the first.
birth_dateNoDate of birth, YYYY-MM-DD. Strongly preferred over `age`: 年齢計算ニ関スル法律 puts the attainment of an age on the day *before* the birthday, so someone born on the 1st of a month crosses a threshold in the previous month and their premium changes a month earlier than a naive calculation gives.
dependantsNo
prefectureYesPrefecture of the employer's 適用事業所 — English ("Tokyo"), Japanese ("東京" or "東京都"), or JIS code 1-47. Health insurance rates differ by prefecture; pension does not.
fiscal_yearNoYear the 1 April to 31 March window starts. Defaults from the current date.
resident_taxNoMonthly resident tax, multiplied by twelve as given. It is never derived here.
business_typeNo
monthly_salaryYesGross monthly pay in yen.
workers_comp_typeNo事業の種類の番号. Charged on bonuses as well, being levied on total wages.
standard_remunerationNoThe 標準報酬月額 fixed by 算定基礎届, if known. Without it the grade is derived from the pay given.

Schema Changelog

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

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4.9/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does so thoroughly: it discloses the cumulative health-insurance cap (5,730,000 from 1 April to 31 March), the per-payment pension cap with no annual total, order-dependent filling, and the income-tax simplification. It even describes the returned rows ('what was counted, whether it was cut, and how much of the year remains').

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 long but every sentence earns its place: purpose, alternative, legal caps, ordering, output semantics, and exclusions are each in their own focused section. It is front-loaded with the core purpose before the complexity.

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

Completeness5/5

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

For an 11-parameter calculation with no output schema and no annotations, the description is complete: it covers the core formula, statutory limits, ordering rules, tax treatment, and the shape of the result. The schema already covers the remaining parameter details, so nothing essential is left to the agent to guess.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is high (82%), so the baseline is 3; the description adds real semantics for the bonuses array by insisting on payment order and cap-filling behavior, and clarifies that income tax is monthly_salary times twelve. It does not need to re-explain the well-described parameters, though it could have tied prefecture and workers_comp_type into the annual-cost narrative more explicitly.

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 opening sentence states the exact computation — 'What one employee costs an employer over a year, bonuses included' — with a specific resource and scope. It differentiates itself from naive payslip multiplication and from sibling tools by naming calculate_bonus and calculate_year_end_adjustment as separate concerns.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

It gives explicit when-to-use guidance: 'Reach for this rather than multiplying a payslip by twelve' and explains why. It also routes bonus withholding to calculate_bonus with include_tax and year-end adjustment to calculate_year_end_adjustment, telling the agent to avoid presenting the result as take-home pay.

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

All 日本の給与・社会保険・労働法 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

A3.8/5.0
Disambiguation4/5

Most tools have distinct, well-defined jobs—payroll calculations, revision judgments, eligibility checks, and data lookups are clearly separated. The main remaining risk is among the standard-remuneration judgment tools and the batch/singleton pairs, but their descriptions are detailed enough to prevent serious misselection.

Naming Consistency3/5

There is a reasonably recognizable pattern with calculate_, judge_, check_, get_, and validate_ groups. However, several noun-phrase names (business_days, consumption_tax, national_insurance, commuting_allowance_exemption) and overlapping verb choices (decide_ vs judge_ vs check_) prevent a fully consistent verb_noun convention.

Tool Count2/5

At 30 tools, the surface is materially larger than the 3–15 range that keeps an agent's selection burden low. Batch variants and three separate standard-remuneration revision tools add complexity, and although the domain is broad, the count feels heavy for an assistant to choose from confidently.

Completeness4/5

The core workflows are well covered: monthly pay, bonuses, overtime, standard-remuneration determination, year-end adjustment, resident tax, leave, worker classification, and invoice validation. Gaps exist around statutory benefit payments such as sickness or maternity allowances and retirement-specific processing, but most payroll and social insurance tasks can be completed without dead ends.

Resources