Untax

audit_combat_deployment_abatement

Read-onlyIdempotent

Audit and calculate ad valorem property tax abatement for active duty service members deployed outside the United States under Fla. Stat. § 196.173 (Form DR-501M) and reciprocal state combat deployment rules.

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": {
      "service_member_name": "<service_member_name>",
      "parcel_id": "<parcel_id>",
      "military_operation_name": "<military_operation_name>",
      "days_deployed_in_tax_year": "<days_deployed_in_tax_year>",
      "annual_ad_valorem_tax_usd": "<annual_ad_valorem_tax_usd>"
    },
    "name": "audit_combat_deployment_abatement"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`parcel_id`	Yes	County parcel ID / APN
`state_code`	No	Two-letter state postal abbreviation (e.g. 'FL', 'TN')
`county_name`	No	County name
`property_address`	No	Property street address
`deployment_end_date`	No	Deployment end date (YYYY-MM-DD)
`service_member_name`	Yes	Active duty service member legal name
`deployment_start_date`	No	Deployment start date (YYYY-MM-DD)
`military_operation_name`	Yes	Designated contingency operation name (e.g. 'Operation Inherent Resolve', 'Operation Spartan Shield')
`annual_ad_valorem_tax_usd`	Yes	Total annual ad valorem real property tax bill in USD
`days_deployed_in_tax_year`	Yes	Number of days deployed outside continental US during the tax year (max 365)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

AddedNov 6, 2026

TDQS

A3.7/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, non-destructive, and closed-world, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the governing statute and form, but as a 'calculate' tool with no output schema it never says what the calculation produces (abatement amount, proration by days deployed, or an eligibility verdict), nor how non-Florida 'reciprocal' jurisdictions are resolved.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with zero filler; the scope, the legal authority, and the form number all carry weight and appear in the first clause.

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

Completeness3/5

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

For a 10-parameter computation tool with no output schema, the description should explain the result shape and any proration or eligibility logic. It names the legal basis but leaves the agent guessing what comes back and whether an ineligible determination is returned or an error.

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% with 10 fully documented properties, so the baseline of 3 applies. The description adds only indirect meaning — the statutory frame clarifies why days_deployed_in_tax_year and military_operation_name matter — but supplies no format, bound, or conditional logic beyond the schema.

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 pair ('audit and calculate') and a precise resource ('ad valorem property tax abatement') scoped to active duty service members deployed outside the US. The statutory citation (Fla. Stat. § 196.173, Form DR-501M) distinguishes it cleanly from adjacent veteran-relief siblings such as audit_disabled_veteran_relief or audit_surviving_spouse_vet_relief.

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?

Usage is implied by the scope statement — call this for a deployed service member's combat-deployment abatement — but there is no explicit when-to-use/when-not guidance, no prerequisites (e.g., is a recorded DD-214 or DR-501M required first?), and no routing to the generic audit_property_tax or to audit_county_dd214_recording.

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

All Untax 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.