Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
ArcaTax

ArcaTax

by Accuarion
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

update_other_inputs

Set itemized deductions, Schedule 1 adjustments, estimated payments, other income, or capital-loss carryovers; each section you provide replaces that section while omitted sections stay unchanged.

Instructions

Set itemized deductions, Schedule 1 adjustments, estimated payments, other income, or capital-loss carryovers. Each section you pass REPLACES that section; sections you omit are untouched.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "update_other_inputs"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
itemizedNo
paymentsNo
tax_yearNo
carryoversNo
adjustmentsNo
other_incomeNo

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A3.7/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations at all, the description carries the full behavioral burden, and it discloses the single most consequential trait: each section passed REPLACES that section wholesale while omitted sections are untouched. That is exactly the destructive-semantics warning an agent needs before calling. It still says nothing about validation failures, whether dependent amounts are recomputed, or any permission requirements.

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 sentences with zero filler. The operation list comes first and the high-risk replace semantics follow immediately, so the highest-value information is front-loaded.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

An output schema exists, so return values need no explanation, and the replace/omit rule covers the main mutation risk. Against a 6-parameter, zero-coverage, annotation-free mutation tool, though, the total silence on tax_year and on how the nested numeric fields are interpreted leaves real gaps.

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 on the six top-level parameters is 0%, so the description must compensate, and it does map five of them by name (itemized, adjustments, payments, other_income, carryovers). However, tax_year is never mentioned, and it does not clarify that child amounts are user-supplied pre-computed figures rather than values the tool derives.

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?

Opens with a specific verb ("Set") and enumerates the five resources it governs: itemized deductions, Schedule 1 adjustments, estimated payments, other income, and capital-loss carryovers. An agent can match each phrase to a top-level parameter, so the scope is unambiguous even without naming a sibling alternative.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The enumerated sections imply when the tool applies (supplying auxiliary 1040 inputs), and the replace/omit rule implies incremental editing. But there is no explicit when-to-use versus when-not, no mention of prerequisites such as an existing filing profile, and no reference to any sibling for related updates.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools