irs-taxpayer-mcp

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

check_credit_eligibility

Read-onlyIdempotent

Check which US tax credits you may qualify for by providing your AGI, filing status, and details like childcare, education, or solar installation. Receive a tailored list of eligible credits based on your inputs.

Instructions

Check which tax credits you may be eligible for based on your situation.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`agi`	Yes	Adjusted Gross Income
`boughtEV`	No	Purchased an electric vehicle this year
`isStudent`	No	Currently enrolled in post-secondary education
`hasChildren`	No	Have qualifying children under 17
`numChildren`	No
`filingStatus`	Yes
`hasChildcare`	No	Pay for childcare to work
`installedSolar`	No	Installed solar panels or renewable energy
`paidForeignTax`	No	Paid income tax to a foreign country
`hasEarnedIncome`	No	Has earned income from work
`hasStudentLoans`	No	Paying student loan interest
`madeHomeImprovements`	No	Made energy-efficient home improvements
`hasMarketplaceInsurance`	No	Bought health insurance through ACA marketplace
`hasRetirementContributions`	No	Contributed to IRA/401k

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

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

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedv1.0.1Sep 7, 2026

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

A3.6/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so no safety contradiction exists. The description adds little behavioral detail beyond the word 'Check', but 'may be eligible' does convey that the result is conditional rather than a firm guarantee.

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?

The description is one concise, front-loaded sentence with no filler. It communicates the core purpose immediately and earns its place.

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?

Given the rich input schema, the required AGI and filing status fields, safety annotations, and an output schema, a short description is sufficient for an agent to select and call the tool. The generic wording leaves some situational details implicit, but the schema compensates.

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 high at 86%, so the schema already explains most parameters and the description does not need to repeat them. The description adds no extra parameter-level meaning and does not clarify the one weakly documented field, numChildren, but the high schema coverage keeps this at the baseline.

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 action ('Check'), a clear resource ('tax credits'), and a clear scope ('eligible based on your situation'). It distinguishes eligibility screening from sibling tools like list_tax_credits, though it does not explicitly name that 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 phrase 'based on your situation' implies this tool should be used when a user has personal/financial details and wants credit eligibility results. However, it does not explicitly state when to prefer this over list_tax_credits, calculate_eitc, or similar siblings, leaving usage somewhat to inference.

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

Deploy Server