irs-taxpayer-mcp

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

analyze_mortgage_tax_benefit

Read-onlyIdempotent

Compare itemized mortgage interest and property tax deductions against the standard deduction to estimate your tax savings.

Instructions

Analyze the tax benefit of mortgage interest deduction and property taxes. Compares itemizing with mortgage vs taking the standard deduction.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`taxYear`	Yes	Tax year
`grossIncome`	Yes	Gross income, also used as MAGI because this tool does not collect MAGI adjustments
`filingStatus`	Yes
`interestRate`	No	Mortgage interest rate (e.g., 0.065 for 6.5%)
`otherItemized`	No	Other itemized deductions (charity, medical, etc.)
`propertyTaxes`	Yes	Annual property taxes paid
`mortgageBalance`	No	Current mortgage balance
`mortgageInterest`	Yes	Annual mortgage interest paid
`stateIncomeTaxes`	No	State/local income taxes paid

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`text`	Yes
`error`	No
`isError`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed2 schema fields changedv1.0.1Sep 7, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / grossIncome / description

Added value: +"Gross income, also used as MAGI because this tool does not collect MAGI adjustments"

changedOutput schema / (root)

Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "$schema": "http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#",
+  "additionalProperties": false,
+  "properties": {
+    "error": {
+      "additionalProperties": false,
+      "properties": {
+        "code": {
+          "type": "string"
+        },
+        "message": {
+          "type": "string"
+        },
+        "suggestion": {
+          "type": "string"
+        }
+      },
+      "required": [
+        "code",
+        "message",
+        "suggestion"
+      ],
+      "type": "object"
+    },
+    "isError": {
+      "type": "boolean"
+    },
+    "text": {
+      "type": "string"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "text",
+    "isError"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}

First observedv0.5.3Feb 25, 2026

TDQS

A4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already establish the tool is read-only and idempotent. The description adds the key behavioral trait that it performs a comparison (itemized-with-mortgage vs standard deduction), which is beyond what the annotations or schema names convey. It does not mention tax-law limitations, but those are not essential for safe invocation.

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 short sentences, with the primary action first and the comparison logic second. Every word adds signal and none of the schema's parameter details are redundantly repeated.

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 and read-only/idempotent annotations, the description need not explain return values or safety. It gives enough context for an agent to know this is a mortgage-focused itemization comparison; only the missing guidance against the sibling standard_vs_itemized keeps this from a 5.

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 89%, so the schema carries most parameter meaning. The description highlights mortgage interest and property taxes as the core inputs but adds no detail beyond what the schema already provides, so it stays at the baseline.

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 uses a specific verb ('Analyze') and a concrete resource ('tax benefit of mortgage interest deduction and property taxes'), then states the comparison logic (itemizing with mortgage vs standard deduction). This clearly differentiates it from the general sibling standard_vs_itemized and the education-specific analyze_education_tax_benefits.

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 scenario is implied: use this when the user asks about mortgage-interest/property-tax itemization benefits. However, it never names the closest sibling standard_vs_itemized or states when to choose one over the other, so the agent must infer the boundary.

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

Deploy Server