Skip to main content
Glama

Xearno Tools

Student Loan: RAP vs IBR (2026 forced choice)

us_student_loan_rap_vs_ibr
Read-only

Your monthly payment and forgiveness timeline under RAP vs IBR — the choice SAVE borrowers are being forced to make. SAVE is dead (vacated, then repealed by the July 2025 law) and the Repayment Assistance Plan (RAP) went live 1 July 2026; PAYE, ICR, and SAVE all end 1 July 2028, when anyone who hasn’t picked is auto-enrolled in RAP. This tool computes your monthly payment under RAP (a %-of-AGI cliff schedule) and IBR (15% or 10% of discretionary income depending on when your first loan was disbursed), the forgiveness horizon for each (30 vs 25/20 years — and 10 tax-free years on PSLF), and the traps: RAP’s payment cliffs at every $10k of AGI, Parent PLUS exclusion, and the new default Tiered Standard plan not counting toward PSLF. General AI still recommends the dead SAVE plan and calls IDR forgiveness tax-free — the ARPA tax exclusion expired 31 Dec 2025.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
agiNoAdjusted gross income (AGI) From your latest federal return. Married filing jointly: combined AGI of both spouses. Married filing separately: yours only.
pslfNoPublic Service Loan Forgiveness track? PSLF flips the strategy: forgiveness arrives at 120 qualifying payments and is federally TAX-FREE, so the lowest qualifying payment wins. Both RAP and IBR qualify; the new Tiered Standard plan does not.no
rateNoAverage interest rate (%) Weighted average across your loans.
stateNoWhere do you live? Alaska and Hawaii have higher poverty guidelines, which lowers IBR payments.contiguous
balanceNoTotal loan balance Outstanding principal. Sets the standard-plan comparator, the IBR payment cap, and the interest math.
loanTypeNoLoan type Parent PLUS loans are excluded from RAP entirely, and reach IBR only through a consolidation carve-out — the answer changes completely.regular
firstLoanNoWhen was your FIRST federal loan disbursed? The decisive input. Your first-ever federal disbursement date sets WHICH IBR you get (15%/25yr vs 10%/20yr) — and loans originated from 1 Jul 2026 can’t use IBR at all. Taking any new loan on/after 1 Jul 2026 also ends IBR eligibility for your old loans.mid
dependentsNoDependents claimed on your return RAP subtracts $50/month per dependent (IRC §152 dependents claimed on your federal return). Not the same thing as family size.
familySizeNoFamily size You + spouse + dependents — sets the poverty-guideline deduction in IBR.

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=true, and the description adds extensive behavioral details: it computes payments, traps (payment cliffs, Parent PLUS exclusion, Tiered Standard not PSLF-eligible), and the consequences of new loans. No contradictions with annotations.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness3/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is long (over 200 words) and dense with detail. While every sentence is informative, it could be more concise and structured (e.g., bullet points). It front-loads the purpose, but the length reduces readability.

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?

Given the tool's complexity (9 parameters, no output schema), the description is very complete. It explains context, traps, and what the tool computes (payment, forgiveness horizon). Without an output schema, it adequately describes return values.

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 coverage is 100% and each parameter has a description. The tool description adds extra context for some parameters (e.g., 'RAP's payment cliffs at every $10k of AGI' for agi). This goes beyond the schema but does not cover all parameters equally.

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 monthly payment and forgiveness timeline under RAP vs IBR for SAVE borrowers forced to choose. It uniquely identifies the specific resource and distinguishes from sibling financial calculators by focusing on this niche student loan decision.

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 provides clear context: the tool is for SAVE borrowers forced to choose between RAP and IBR. It mentions related plans (PAYE, ICR, SAVE) and that this is a forced choice, implying when to use. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use or list alternative tools.

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