Xearno Tools

US Federal Estate-Tax Exposure (2026 — the sunset that didn’t happen)

us_estate_tax_exemption

Read-only

Whether your estate owes federal estate tax under the permanent $15M exclusion — and what the “2026 sunset” answer would have wrongly told you. Computes federal estate-tax exposure under the 2026 rules: a flat $15,000,000 basic exclusion per person, made PERMANENT by OBBBA §70106 — the long-scheduled TCJA sunset to ~$7M never happened, but AI trained before mid-2025 still tells you it did. Accounts for lifetime taxable gifts already made (they consume the unified exclusion) and a deceased spouse’s unused exclusion (DSUE) via portability. Shows the prior-law contrast so you can see exactly how much the “sunset” answer would have overstated your tax, and flags the separate state-level estate taxes (12 states + DC, thresholds from $1M) that the federal all-clear does not cover.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`state`	No	Does your state levy its own estate tax? WA, OR, MN, IL, MD, MA, RI, CT, VT, NY, ME, HI + DC levy their own estate tax with thresholds far below $15M (Oregon starts at $1M). This tool flags it but computes federal only.	no-estate-tax
`dsueAmount`	No	DSUE amount from deceased spouse ($) The unused exclusion ported from your deceased spouse (from their Form 706). Only applies with the “surviving spouse with elected DSUE” status above.
`estateValue`	No	Gross estate value ($) Everything you own at death — real estate, investments, retirement accounts, business interests, life-insurance proceeds you own. Use today’s value as an estimate.
`maritalStatus`	No	Marital / portability situation DSUE (deceased spousal unused exclusion) only counts if a Form 706 was filed for the deceased spouse to elect portability — it is not automatic.	single
`lifetimeGiftsUsed`	No	Lifetime taxable gifts already made ($) Cumulative gifts above the annual exclusion ($19,000/recipient in 2026) reported on gift-tax returns. These consume your unified exclusion before death.

TDQS

A4.5/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

The description fully discloses behavioral traits: read-only calculation, uses $15M exclusion permanently, accounts for gifts and DSUE, shows contrast with prior law, and flags state taxes. Annotations confirm readOnlyHint=true, and no contradictions exist. All relevant behaviors are explained.

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?

The description is front-loaded with the main purpose, but includes a lengthy note about AI training. While informative, it could be slightly more concise. Every sentence adds value, but the structure is slightly verbose.

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?

With no output schema, the description describes the output: federal tax exposure, prior-law contrast, and state tax flag. It covers all 5 parameters and their interactions. Lacks explicit return format, but is sufficient for a calculator tool.

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

Parameters4/5

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 adds context on how parameters interact (e.g., lifetime gifts consume unified exclusion) and the significance of the 'sunset' for the exclusion amount. This enhances understanding 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?

The description clearly states the tool computes federal estate tax exposure under permanent $15M exclusion, accounts for lifetime gifts and DSUE, shows prior-law contrast, and flags state estate taxes. Verb+resource is specific, and sibling tools are other financial calculators, none duplicating this function.

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 explains when to use the tool (to check estate tax under permanent rules) and warns about the outdated 'sunset' misconception. It also notes that state estate taxes are not covered. However, it does not explicitly compare to alternatives within the sibling list, but context is clear.

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?