Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

MaCalculatriceEnLigne

by io.github.tresor4k
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Calculate French Income Tax

calculate_french_income_tax
Read-onlyIdempotent

Calculate French income tax (IR) 2026 on 2025 income per Article 197 CGI: progressive brackets with family quotient, family-quotient cap (1,807 EUR per extra half-share beyond 1 share single / 2 shares couple, 903.50 EUR per quarter share) and décote (897 EUR single / 1,483 EUR couple minus 45.25% of tax). Not implemented: the 4,262 EUR cap for single parents (parent isolé) and the special 1,079 / 1,801 EUR cases of art. 197 I-2; DOM reductions. Returns: {income, family_quotient, tax_before_cap, qf_cap, tax_after_cap, decote, total_tax, effective_rate_pct, marginal_rate_pct, brackets}. See list_bundles for related 'finance-france' calculators.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
partsNoNumber of fiscal shares (1=single, 2=married, +0.5 per child)
coupleNotrue = joint taxation (married/PACS couple, base 2 shares); false = individual taxation (base 1 share)
incomeYesAnnual net taxable income in euros

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultNoComputed result. Object whose fields depend on the tool (e.g. {tax, marginal_rate, brackets} for tax tools, {volume_l, gallons} for volume tools).
sourceNoAuthoritative source for the rule or formula (e.g. "Article 197 CGI", "NF DTU 21").
formulaNoHuman-readable formula or method used (e.g. "I=P·r·t", "Magnus formula").
reference_urlNoLink to a calcul2 page documenting the calculation in detail.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / couple
      Added value: +{
+  "default": false,
+  "description": "true = joint taxation (married/PACS couple, base 2 shares); false = individual taxation (base 1 share)",
+  "type": "boolean"
+}
  2. First observed

TDQS

A4.6/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already cover the safety profile (readOnly, idempotent, closed-world), and the description goes well beyond them by disclosing the algorithm (progressive brackets, family quotient, QF cap amounts, décote formula), the exact limitations of the implementation, and the returned fields. Explicitly flagging unimplemented edge cases is high-value behavioral disclosure.

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

Conciseness4/5

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

Front-loaded with purpose, year and legal reference before the detailed formula and limitation clauses; every clause carries substantive tax-law information. It is a dense, long single block rather than clearly separated sentences, which slightly hurts scannability.

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 a 3-parameter, read-only calculation tool with full schema coverage, an output schema and complete annotations, nothing essential is missing: it names the formula basis, the year, the scope limits and the return fields. An agent can call it correctly without further context.

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 100% (baseline 3), and the description still adds meaning by explaining the half-share mechanics and cap ('1,807 EUR per extra half-share beyond 1 share single / 2 shares couple, 903.50 EUR per quarter share'), which directly contextualizes the `parts` and `couple` parameters. It adds real interpretation beyond the terse schema text.

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 and resource (calculate French income tax) plus the exact tax year (2026 on 2025 income) and legal basis (Article 197 CGI). This is enough to distinguish it from siblings like calculate_french_salary, calculate_belgian_income_tax, calculate_swiss_income_tax and calculate_crypto_tax_fr without opening a 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 clear context and explicit scope exclusions ('Not implemented: the 4,262 EUR cap for single parents... DOM reductions'), which tells an agent when this tool will produce wrong answers. It also points to list_bundles for related 'finance-france' calculators. It stops short of naming a direct sibling alternative for the unsupported cases, so it is not a full 5.

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

All MaCalculatriceEnLigne 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