Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

Turkey Salary Calculator

by nl.nltaxcalculator
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Net salary: Turkey vs the Netherlands

compare_with_netherlands
Read-onlyIdempotent

Take-home pay of a job in Turkey (with the situation options of net_salary) next to a job in the Netherlands (2026, optionally with the 8% holiday allowance and the 30% ruling), in euros, with the difference a year.

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": {
      "home_gross_annual": "<home_gross_annual>",
      "nl_gross_annual": "<nl_gross_annual>"
    },
    "name": "compare_with_netherlands"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
besNoPrivate pension auto-enrolment (BES, 3%) Default false.
incentiveNoEmployer SGK incentive: 2 = 2 points (most sectors, 2026); 5 = 5 points (manufacturing); 0 = None. Default 2.
fx_per_eurNoExchange rate: 1 euro = this many TRY, for the euro amounts. Default 38 (indicative).
bonus_annualNoYearly bonus in TRY. Default 0.
nl_gross_annualYesGross yearly salary in the Netherlands, in euros, without holiday allowance
home_gross_annualYesGross yearly salary in Turkey, in TRY
nl_holiday_allowanceNoThe Dutch job pays 8% holiday allowance on top. Default true.
nl_thirty_percent_rulingNoThe 30% ruling applies in the Netherlands. Default false.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A3.7/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive, closed-world behavior, so the safety bar is low. The description still adds real context beyond them: the result is expressed in euros, uses 2026 rules, and reports a yearly difference, plus the notable Dutch toggles (8% holiday allowance, 30% ruling) that change outcomes. It does not spell out that TRY inputs are converted via the fx rate or how the difference is framed, which leaves a small gap.

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?

A single sentence that front-loads the two compared figures and ends with the output (annual difference). The nested parentheticals ('with the situation options of net_salary', '2026, optionally with ...') make it denser than it needs to be, but there is no filler.

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 an 8-parameter comparison tool with full schema coverage and a complete annotation set, the description covers the essentials: what is compared, the currency, the tax year, the two optional Dutch regimes, and that the headline output is a yearly difference. It does not state how the Turkish gross is converted or what the return structure looks like, but with no output schema that is a modest gap rather than a blocking one.

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 eight parameters is already documented with defaults and enum meanings. The description adds only a light gloss on the holiday-allowance and 30%-ruling options and no semantics for bes, incentive, bonus_annual, or fx_per_eur. This is the baseline 3 case where the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 names a specific computation with two explicit resources: take-home pay in Turkey versus the Netherlands, in euros, with the annual difference. It anchors the Turkish side to the sibling 'net_salary' options, so an agent can tell it is a cross-country comparison rather than a single-country calculator. It stops short of the sharpest possible framing (e.g. 'use this instead of net_salary when comparing two countries'), which keeps it from a 5.

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 only implied: the mention of 'net_salary' situation options signals this is the comparison counterpart to the single-country tool, and the two gross-salary parameters make the when clear by construction. There is no explicit when-to-use, when-not, or named alternative for someone who only wants one country's number. It is adequate but leaves routing for an agent to infer.

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

All Turkey Salary Calculator 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