Xearno Tools

Freelance Rate Calculator

freelance_rate

Read-only

The hourly rate that actually pays your target income — after unbillable time, overhead, and tax. Works backward from target income to the rate you must charge: subtracting non-billable time, business overhead, time off, and the self-employment tax gap that makes a freelance hour worth less than an employed one.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`overhead`	No	Business costs / year Software, equipment, insurance, coworking, accounting.
`weeksOff`	No	Weeks off / year Vacation + sick + dry spells between clients.
`taxBuffer`	No	Tax & contributions buffer (%) Income tax + self-employment/social contributions on profit.
`targetIncome`	No	Target annual take-home
`billableHours`	No	Billable hours / week Realistic for full-time freelancing: 20-30. Sales, admin, and email are not billable.

TDQS

A4.2/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the description adds value by explaining the backward calculation logic (subtracting non-billable time, overhead, tax gap). No contradictions.

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?

Two concise sentences that front-load the purpose and efficiently explain the methodology. No wasted words.

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?

Almost complete: explains the inputs and logic but does not explicitly mention the output format. With no output schema, a brief note on return value would improve completeness. Otherwise covers the tool's operation well.

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 baseline is 3. The tool description provides overall context but does not add per-parameter meaning beyond the schema. However, it explains why taxBuffer includes self-employment tax, adding slight value.

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 description clearly states the tool's purpose: calculating the hourly rate needed to achieve a target income after accounting for unbillable time, overhead, and tax. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like 'us_freelance_vs_employee' and 'true_hourly_wage' by focusing on rate setting.

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?

The description implies when to use (to determine a freelance rate), but does not explicitly mention when not to use or name alternatives. Given the clear use case, it still provides good guidance.

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

All Xearno Tools tools Inspect

Try in Browser

RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A3.9/5.0

Disambiguation4/5

Each tool targets a distinct niche (e.g., specific country tax rules, loan types, or legal calculations), with detailed descriptions that clarify boundaries. However, the large number of tools (66) could cause some confusion for an agent trying to select the right one for a general query, especially when multiple tools relate to the same country.

Naming Consistency4/5

Tool names follow a mostly predictable pattern: lowercase words separated by underscores, often starting with a country name (e.g., 'uk_stamp_duty_sdlt') or a topic (e.g., 'compound_growth'). There are minor deviations, such as abbreviations ('npv_irr', 'sip') and varying use of verbs, but overall the naming is clear and consistent.

Tool Count3/5

At 66 tools, the server is unusually large and covers an extensive range of financial and legal calculators. While each tool justifies its existence, the count exceeds the typical well-scoped range (3–15), making the server feel bloated. A more modular design might improve coherence.

Completeness4/5

The tool set covers a wide array of domains: personal income taxes, property taxes, loan calculations, investment returns, and specific country regulations. Minor gaps exist (e.g., missing tools for corporate taxes, general retirement planning, or insurance), but the overall coverage is thorough and addresses many niche scenarios that general AI handles poorly.

Resources

Need Help?