Current UK tax-year rates and thresholds, verified against gov.uk with source URLs and dates.
Scored across 1 tool
With only a single tool, there is no possibility of confusing it with another tool. The one tool has a clearly defined purpose covering all UK rates and thresholds.
The single tool uses a clear, descriptive snake_case name with a lookup verb. There are no additional tools to create inconsistent conventions.
The server has only one tool, which feels minimal even though the lookup covers many rate categories. The narrow scope makes it defensible, but the surface is thin compared to typical well-rounded tool sets.
The tool explicitly covers the major UK financial categories users would ask about, and includes verification with source URLs. For a rates lookup server, there are no obvious missing operations or categories.
Current UK (2026-27) rates and thresholds, verified against gov.uk with source URLs and verification dates. Categories: income-tax, national-insurance, minimum-wage, student-loans, vat, isa, state-pension, stamp-duty, capital-gains, pensions. Use whenever a user asks about UK income tax, National Insurance, minimum wage, student loans, VAT, ISAs, pensions, stamp duty, capital gains or the State Pension — models reliably misremember these numbers.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| category | No | one of: income-tax, national-insurance, minimum-wage, student-loans, vat, isa, state-pension, stamp-duty, capital-gains, pensions (omit to list all) |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that data is current for 2026-27, sourced from gov.uk, and includes source URLs and verification dates — a concrete freshness and traceability guarantee. It stops short of describing output shape or error behavior, but for a read-only lookup the key behavioral traits are covered.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is compact: a scoping sentence, a category enumeration, and a usage directive. The category list is long but necessary for disambiguation. There is slight redundancy with the schema's category list, but overall it is front-loaded and every sentence earns its place.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
For a tool with one optional parameter and no output schema, the description tells an agent what the tool returns, which values are supported, and when to use it. It lacks a sample output or explicit statement that it is read-only, but these are minor gaps for such a simple, well-scoped lookup.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
The schema already documents the single parameter completely, including the 'omit to list all' behavior, so description coverage is 100%. The tool description repeats the category list but adds no semantic detail beyond the schema, meeting the baseline 3 without exceeding it.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description names the resource ('UK (2026-27) rates and thresholds') and the action (lookup/return), and explicitly enumerates ten categories. It is a specific verb-resource combination, not a tautology, and the 'verified against gov.uk' detail solidifies the scope.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The description explicitly says 'Use whenever a user asks about...' and lists all triggering topics, with a rationale ('models reliably misremember these numbers'). This gives an agent clear conditions for invocation, and no exclusions are needed since there are no sibling tools.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Recent tool additions, removals, and schema changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
uk_rates_lookupVerified answers with named sources: UK parking appeals, NYC dismissal rates, UK MTD tax facts.
Over 200 free UK-focused calculators, converters and generators as MCP tools: take-home pay and National Insurance for 2026/27, VAT, stamp duty, mortgages, loans, savings, inflation since 1988, currency with live rates, dates and working days with bank holidays, unit conversions, health calculators, colour and text utilities, encoding, hashing, JWT and TOTP, and validators for IBANs and Bitcoin and Ethereum addresses. Every tool is read-only, stateless and computes on the spot; nothing you send is stored. Each result links to its source page on hopi.co.uk.
UK tolls & charges: DVLA vehicle checks (ULEZ/CAZ/MOT/tax), prices, penalties, pay-by deadlines.
Free public tax MCP: GST/VAT, income, company & capital-gains tax for 50+ countries, source-cited.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
