Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
irs-taxpayer-mcp

irs-taxpayer-mcp

by dma9527
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

get_retirement_accounts

Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieve contribution limits, tax treatment, income limits, and tips for retirement account types such as Roth IRA, 401(k), HSA, and SEP IRA; omit account type to view all.

Instructions

Get details on retirement account types — contribution limits, tax treatment, income limits, and tips.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
accountTypeNoSpecific account (e.g., 'roth_ira', '401k', 'hsa', 'sep_ira'). Leave empty for all

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
textYes
errorNo
isErrorYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv1.2.4
    • removedInput schema / additionalProperties
      Removed value: -false
  2. Changed1 schema field changedv1.0.1
    • 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"
+}
  3. First observedv0.5.3

TDQS

A3.7/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, non-destructive and closed-world, so the safety profile is fully covered. The description adds the useful signal that this is a static fact sheet (limits, tax treatment, income limits, tips) rather than a calculator, but says nothing about caching, update cadence, or how the 'tips' content is structured. With annotations carrying the safety burden and an output schema covering returns, a 3 is appropriate.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence that names the resource and then lists the four categories of returned information. No filler, no restatement of the tool name, and the em-dash list makes the value proposition scannable.

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?

For a one-optional-parameter read tool with full schema coverage, complete annotations, and an output schema, the description covers what the tool returns at a category level. Nothing critical is missing, though a note on how 'tips' differ from get_retirement_strategy would close the remaining gap.

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

Parameters4/5

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

Schema description coverage is 100% and the single optional parameter already documents examples ('roth_ira', '401k', 'hsa', 'sep_ira') and the empty-means-all behavior. The description reinforces the concept of account types but adds no new syntax or filtering semantics beyond the schema, so it sits at the expected baseline rather than excelling.

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 gives a specific verb ('Get details') plus resource ('retirement account types') and enumerates the content covered (contribution limits, tax treatment, income limits, tips). It is clearly distinguishable from siblings like get_retirement_strategy or plan_retirement_withdrawals by being a reference lookup rather than a planner, but it never explicitly states that distinction.

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?

Usage is only implied: the phrasing suggests a static reference lookup for account-type facts, and the schema's 'Leave empty for all' hints at bulk retrieval. There is no explicit when-to-use, no exclusion of planning-oriented siblings such as get_retirement_strategy, and no guidance on when a caller should instead use plan_retirement_withdrawals.

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