EveryCalc

calculate_gi_bill

Read-onlyIdempotent

Months of the 36-month Post-9/11 GI Bill entitlement remaining, tuition coverage percent, maximum annual books stipend, and Monthly Housing Allowance treatment for the given benefit tier and enrollment level. Use when the user asks what the Post-9/11 GI Bill covers or how much entitlement remains. IMPORTANT: always show the calculator_url from the result as a clickable markdown link in your answer to the user, so they can open the interactive GI Bill calculator.

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`tier_pct`	No	Post-9/11 GI Bill benefit tier percent based on qualifying service.
`enrollment`	No	Enrollment level: full-time, part-time (over half-time), or half-time or less.
`months_used`	No	Months of entitlement already used, 0 to 36.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description
`ok`	Yes	True when the calculation succeeded.
`note`	Yes	Disclaimer that accompanies every result.
`tool`	Yes	Name of the tool that ran.
`inputs`	No	The normalized inputs the calculation used.
`results`	Yes	The computed figures for this calculator.
`calculator_url`	Yes	Deep link to the matching interactive calculator on everycalc.xyz.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed2 schema fields changedOct 21, 2026

addedOutput schema / properties / note

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Disclaimer that accompanies every result.",
+  "type": "string"
+}

changedOutput schema / required

Previous value: -[
-  "ok",
-  "tool",
-  "results",
-  "calculator_url"
-]New value: +[
+  "ok",
+  "tool",
+  "results",
+  "calculator_url",
+  "note"
+]

Changed1 schema field changedOct 17, 2026

changedOutput schema / (root)

Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "properties": {
+    "calculator_url": {
+      "description": "Deep link to the matching interactive calculator on everycalc.xyz.",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "inputs": {
+      "description": "The normalized inputs the calculation used.",
+      "type": "object"
+    },
+    "ok": {
+      "description": "True when the calculation succeeded.",
+      "type": "boolean"
+    },
+    "results": {
+      "description": "The computed figures for this calculator.",
+      "type": "object"
+    },
+    "tool": {
+      "description": "Name of the tool that ran.",
+      "type": "string"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "ok",
+    "tool",
+    "results",
+    "calculator_url"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}

First observedOct 15, 2026

TDQS

A3.9/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already cover the safety profile (readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false), so the bar is lower. The description adds a genuinely useful behavioral directive absent from structured fields: always render the calculator_url from the result as a clickable markdown link. That is real presentation-handling context beyond the schema.

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?

Three tight sentences with no filler; the trigger condition is stated before the presentation directive. The opening noun phrase is dense but front-loads the domain and the key differentiator (entitlement).

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 an output schema present, the description needn't explain return values, yet the calculator_url handling instruction fills the one gap an agent would otherwise miss. Given rich annotations and 100% schema coverage, an agent has everything needed to call and present the tool correctly.

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 description references 'benefit tier and enrollment level' but omits months_used and adds no syntax, ranges, or format detail beyond what the schema and enum values already provide.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description names a specific resource (Post-9/11 GI Bill entitlement) and enumerates the exact outputs (months remaining, tuition coverage percent, books stipend, MHA), which clearly separates it from siblings like calculate_military_pay or calculate_bah. The verb 'calculate' is only implied by the name rather than stated, but the domain is unambiguous.

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?

It states an explicit trigger: 'Use when the user asks what the Post-9/11 GI Bill covers or how much entitlement remains.' That is clear context for invocation. No alternatives or exclusions are named, but the sibling set makes overlap unlikely.

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

All EveryCalc tools Inspect

Try in Browser

One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.