irs-taxpayer-mcp

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

analyze_relocation_taxes

Read-onlyIdempotent

Compare tax liability between current and target states using exact-year profiles. Provide income, filing status, and tax year to estimate relocation impact.

Instructions

In-depth relocation tax analysis using exact-year state profiles. Additional projection years require explicit annual federal and state data.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`taxYear`	Yes	Tax year
`toState`	Yes	Target state code
`fromState`	Yes	Current state code
`dependents`	No
`grossIncome`	Yes	Annual gross income
`capitalGains`	No
`filingStatus`	Yes
`yearsToProject`	No	Years to project with explicit annual profiles (default: 1)
`incomeGrowthRate`	No	Annual income growth rate (e.g., 0.03 for 3%)
`selfEmploymentIncome`	No

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

changedInput schema / properties / yearsToProject / description

Previous value: -"Years to project savings (default: 5)"New value: +"Years to project with explicit annual profiles (default: 1)"

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

B3.2/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint true, idempotentHint true, and destructiveHint false. The description adds the exact-year state profile requirement and the need for explicit annual federal/state data for projections, but it does not disclose other behavioral details such as whether the analysis covers federal tax, state tax, or both.

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, both essential, with the core value stated first and the key limitation second. No wasted words or redundant information.

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

Completeness2/5

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

For a tool with 10 parameters, 5 required inputs, and an output schema, the description is too sparse. It does not explain what the analysis returns, how optional inputs like capital gains or self-employment income factor in, or what 'explicit annual federal and state data' means when supplying projection years. An agent would need additional inference to call this tool correctly.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters2/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 60%, and the description adds no per-parameter detail beyond what the schema already provides. Several parameters (dependents, capitalGains, selfEmploymentIncome) remain undocumented in both schema and description, and the phrase 'exact-year state profiles' only loosely relates to taxYear and yearsToProject without explaining input expectations.

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 states a specific task ('relocation tax analysis') with useful qualifiers ('in-depth', 'exact-year state profiles'). It clearly identifies the resource and domain, though it does not explicitly differentiate itself from siblings like compare_state_taxes or plan_multi_year_taxes.

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 description implies the tool is for relocation tax analysis, which gives some usage context. However, it never states when to prefer this tool over alternatives such as calculate_total_tax or compare_state_taxes, and it only mentions the projection-year input requirement as a constraint.

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

Deploy Server