Poland Salary Calculator

Gross salary needed for a net amount in Poland

gross_for_target_net

Read-onlyIdempotent

The gross yearly salary in Poland that leaves a given take-home pay, with the same situation options as net_salary. Use it to set a salary ask or check an offer.

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": {
      "net_target": "<net_target>"
    },
    "name": "gross_for_target_net"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`age`	No	Age; changes the result here (young-worker reliefs, senior slabs, surcharges). Default 35.
`ppk`	No	Employee Capital Plan (PPK). You pay 2%, the employer 1.5% (taxable for you). Default false.
`joint`	No	Joint return with spouse Default true.
`author`	No	Share of pay under copyright. Creative work (software, design, writing): 50% costs on that part, up to 120,000 zł of costs. (%). Default 0.
`period`	No	Whether net_target is per year or per month. Default year.
`married`	No	Married or registered partner. Default false.
`children`	No	Number of dependent children. Default 0.
`commuter`	No	Live outside the town where you work. Standard costs of 300 zł instead of 250 zł a month. Default false.
`fx_per_eur`	No	Exchange rate: 1 euro = this many PLN, for the euro amounts. Default 4.25 (indicative).
`net_target`	Yes	Take-home pay wanted, in PLN
`bonus_annual`	No	Yearly bonus in PLN. Default 0.
`return_relief`	No	Return relief (ulga na powrót). For 4 years after moving to Poland, for Polish citizens or people with Polish roots who lived abroad for 3+ years. Default false.
`spouse_income`	No	Partner's gross yearly income in PLN, for joint taxation and spouse allowances. Default 0.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedNov 9, 2026

TDQS

A3.5/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=false, so the agent knows this is a safe, deterministic lookup-style calculation. The description adds the useful framing that the parameter situation matches net_salary, but says nothing about accuracy, rounding, tax-year applicability, or that fx_per_eur defaults are indicative — context that matters for a financial estimate.

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?

Two short sentences, the core result is front-loaded, and there is no filler. The only minor imprecision is 'gross yearly salary' when the period parameter allows a monthly net_target, so the description slightly overstates the yearly framing.

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?

For a 13-parameter but fully schema-documented calculation with complete annotations and no output schema, the description covers what the tool returns (a gross figure that yields the requested take-home) and points to net_salary for the parameter model. It could be stronger by noting the estimate nature and Polish tax-year assumptions.

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%, so every one of the 13 parameters is documented in the schema itself, which sets the baseline at 3. The description only adds that the options mirror net_salary; it adds no syntax, units, or interaction notes beyond what the schema already supplies.

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 gives a specific verb-like result and resource: 'the gross yearly salary in Poland that leaves a given take-home pay' — an agent immediately knows this is the inverse of a net calculator. It implicitly distinguishes itself from the sibling net_salary by naming it as the source of 'the same situation options,' though it never states outright that net_salary is the reverse operation.

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?

'Use it to set a salary ask or check an offer' gives a concrete scenario, which is more than nothing. However, there is no explicit when-not guidance and no direct routing statement such as 'if you know the gross and want the net, use net_salary instead' — the agent must infer the direction from the wording.

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

All Poland Salary Calculator 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.

Resources

Need Help?