Skip to main content
Glama

jp-crypto-tax-rules

by io.github.kodandy

Curated scenario rule pack (x402 metered)

get_rule_pack

Scenario-curated bundle of full structured rules (statements, citations, parameters) for one use case: defi_staking | overseas_exchange | corporate_holding | transition_2028. Paid via x402: each call costs 0.05 USDC. This tool returns the HTTP 402 payment challenge (spec-conformant accepts list) for the pack resource. The 402 is real: settle it against /v1/packs/{scenario} with an X-PAYMENT header and the 200 response delivers the full pack body ({status:"settled", settlement, pack}) — payment buys the actual structured rules, not a receipt. Not tax advice. 一般的な税制情報の提供であり、個別の税務判断は税理士にご相談ください。

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
scenarioYesScenario pack to retrieve: defi_staking | overseas_exchange | corporate_holding | transition_2028

TDQS

A3.6/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description fully discloses the 402 payment challenge, cost (0.05 USDC), settlement process (X-PAYMENT header), and expected 200 response structure. It also includes disclaimers. However, it does not detail failure modes or rate limits, which slightly reduces completeness.

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 description is longer than necessary, mixing core functionality, payment details, and legal disclaimers (including Japanese text). While each part serves a purpose, it could be more concise without losing essential 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?

Given the complexity (paid, multi-step flow) and lack of output schema or annotations, the description adequately covers the tool's operation: it returns a 402 challenge, requires settlement, and returns the pack body. Disclaimers are included. Minor gaps exist (e.g., no mention of error handling for invalid scenarios, but schema enforces enum).

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 has 100% coverage, describing the single 'scenario' parameter with enum values. The description redundantly lists the same enum values, adding no additional semantic meaning beyond the schema.

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 it retrieves a curated bundle of structured rules for specific scenarios, with stated use cases (defi_staking, etc.). It distinguishes from siblings (get_tax_parameters, get_tax_rule, list_tax_rules) by being a paid, scenario-specific bundle. However, the description is somewhat verbose, mixing payment details and disclaimers.

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?

The description implies this tool is for retrieving a complete rule pack for a specific scenario, while siblings are for individual parameters or rules. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this vs. alternatives, nor does it provide exclusions or prerequisites.

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

All jp-crypto-tax-rules 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

A4.1/5.0
Disambiguation5/5

Each tool has a clearly distinct purpose: list_tax_rules catalogs rules, get_tax_rule retrieves a single rule, get_tax_parameters provides tax parameters, and get_rule_pack delivers scenario-based bundles. No functional overlap.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tool names follow a consistent verb_noun pattern: list_tax_rules, get_tax_rule, get_tax_parameters, get_rule_pack. The naming convention is uniform and predictable.

Tool Count5/5

With 4 tools, the server is well-scoped for its domain (Japanese crypto tax rules). Each tool serves a necessary function, and the count is neither too sparse nor excessive.

Completeness4/5

The tool surface covers cataloging, single-rule retrieval, parameters, and scenario packs. Minor gap: no batch retrieval for full rules by category, but list with filtering partially addresses this.

Resources