Skip to main content
Glama

Calculate.co.nz NZ Calculators

nz_acc_weekly_compensation_calculator

Estimate what ACC pays each week while an injury stops someone working.

Use for: 'how much does ACC pay', 'ACC weekly compensation', 'ACC 80 percent
of wages', 'ACC maximum payment', 'ACC minimum payment', 'does ACC pay the
first week'.

"80% OF YOUR EARNINGS" IS THE HEADLINE AND IT IS INCOMPLETE THREE WAYS.

THE FIRST WEEK IS THE EMPLOYER'S COST, NOT ACC'S. ACC starts from the second
week. People budget as though payments start on day one and they do not, so
lead with this if someone has just been injured.

THERE IS A CEILING. Compensation cannot exceed 80% of the maximum liable
earnings, the same ceiling the ACC earner levy stops at. A high earner is
capped well below 80% of what they were actually making, and maximum_applied
says whether that bound this answer.

THERE IS A FLOOR, BUT ONLY FOR FULL-TIME EARNERS, meaning 30 hours a week or
more. It is 80% of the adult minimum wage for a 40 hour week. A part-timer on
low earnings is NOT lifted to it. This is the one most often assumed the
other way round.

Both bounds are derived from the rate register rather than typed, so they
move on 1 April with the levy ceiling and the minimum wage.

The short-term basis uses the four weeks before the injury and applies for
the first four weeks; after that ACC moves to a 52 week basis, which matters
a great deal for anyone with irregular or seasonal earnings.

This is an estimate on published settings, not a decision on any claim.
Entitlement depends on cover being accepted and an assessed incapacity.

Args:
    weekly_earnings: Gross weekly earnings before the injury.
    hours_per_week: Hours normally worked. 30 or more is full time.
    basis: short_term for the first four weeks, long_term after.

Returns:
    The weekly payment, the uncapped 80% figure, both bounds, whether either
    applied, and what the employer pays for the first week.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
basisNoshort_term
hours_per_weekNo
weekly_earningsYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Added

TDQS

A4.8/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

With no annotations at all, the description carries full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It explains the three gaps in the 80% headline, the employer-paid first week, a ceiling, a floor only for full-time earners, rate-register-driven bounds, and the short-term vs 52-week basis.

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?

Though lengthy, the description is modular: use cases, warnings, boundary logic, and returns. Each paragraph adds a distinct fact needed to use the calculator correctly, and the most important caveat (first week) is emphasized early.

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?

No output schema exists, but the Returns sentence names all result components: weekly payment, uncapped 80%, bounds, applicability, and employer first-week pay. Combined with the rate-register and basis explanations, an agent has enough to call and interpret the tool correctly.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters5/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The schema gives only types and defaults, so coverage is 0%. The Args section defines each parameter: weekly_earnings as gross pre-injury weekly earnings, hours_per_week with the 30-hour full-time threshold, and basis with explicit short_term and long_term periods.

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?

The opening sentence identifies the exact resource: 'Estimate what ACC pays each week while an injury stops someone working.' It also gives search-phrase examples that distinguish it from other calculators, so the agent can select it on user intent.

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?

A dedicated 'Use for' list maps user phrasings to this tool, and the first-week warning tells the agent to lead with that fact for newly injured users. It stops short of naming when not to use the tool or alternative calculators, so I deduct one point.

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

Try in Browser

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources