Skip to main content
Glama

Xearno Tools

Is This Raise Actually a Raise? (2026 benefits cliff)

us_raise_benefits_cliff
Read-only

What a raise really adds after EITC, CTC, SNAP, Medicaid, and ACA subsidies move against it — the effective marginal rate no single program shows. For working households on any support program, a raise triggers five simultaneous countercurrents: federal tax and FICA go up, EITC phases out (up to 21¢ per dollar), SNAP tapers (30¢ per net dollar), Medicaid ends abruptly at 138% of the poverty line, and — new for 2026 — the ACA subsidy cliff at 400% FPL is back after the enhanced credits expired 31 Dec 2025. Stacked, effective marginal rates in the $25k–$45k band routinely exceed 60–80%. This tool computes your household’s net resources before and after a raise using the verified 2026 parameter tables, and names each cliff the raise crosses. The decisive inputs are ones most people don’t know matter: whether your state expanded Medicaid, and whether it raised the SNAP gross-income limit.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
bbceNoSNAP gross-income limit in your state Most states raised the SNAP entry limit to 200% FPL via Broad-Based Categorical Eligibility — whether yours did decides where the SNAP door slams. Check your state SNAP page if unsure.bbce200
kidsNoQualifying children (under 17) Sets CTC ($2,200 each), the EITC schedule, and household size for SNAP/Medicaid.
rentNoMonthly rent / shelter cost Rent plus basic utilities — drives SNAP’s excess-shelter deduction, which changes the benefit materially.
raiseNoThe raise (annual amount) Annual value of the raise, extra hours, or second job you are weighing.
filingNoFiling status Married filing jointly assumes a 2-adult household; single and head-of-household assume 1 adult.hoh
incomeNoCurrent annual earned income (household) Gross W-2 wages for the household before tax. This model treats all income as earned.
premiumNoMarketplace benchmark premium (monthly, optional) The second-lowest-cost Silver plan for your household on healthcare.gov. Enter it to model ACA subsidies and the restored 400% FPL cliff; leave 0 to skip health-coverage math.
expansionNoDid your state expand Medicaid? The decisive input. In expansion states adults keep Medicaid up to 138% of the poverty line — and lose it in one step above. In the 10 non-expansion states, adults below 100% FPL may get no help at all (the coverage gap). *WI covers adults to 100% FPL by waiver.yes

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations indicate readOnlyHint=true, which aligns with the tool being a calculator. The description adds behavioral context: it models five simultaneous countercurrents, uses 2026 parameter tables, and names each cliff. This goes beyond what annotations provide.

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?

The description is a single, well-structured paragraph. It is front-loaded with the purpose, then explains the mechanism, and ends with key inputs. No unnecessary words; every sentence adds value for a complex tool.

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?

Given the complexity (8 parameters, all optional, no output schema), the description provides a thorough overview of purpose, behavioral model, and critical inputs. It does not describe the output format or provide examples, but the rich parameter descriptions compensate.

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 the baseline is 3. The tool description adds overarching model context but does not repeat or significantly enhance the meaning of individual parameters beyond the schema. It mentions 'decisive inputs' but that's already in parameter descriptions.

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 it computes net resources before and after a raise considering benefit cliffs (EITC, CTC, SNAP, Medicaid, ACA). The verb 'computes' is specific to the resource, and it distinguishes itself from siblings by naming the unique programs and the 'benefits cliff' concept.

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 explicitly says it's for 'working households on any support program' and mentions decisive inputs. It does not explicitly contrast with similar tools (e.g., tax calculators) but the context makes it clear when to use it. Lacking a direct 'when not to use' statement keeps it from a 5.

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.

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