irs-taxpayer-mcp

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

plan_retirement_withdrawals

Read-onlyIdempotent

Plan tax-efficient retirement withdrawals by calculating the order to draw from Traditional IRA, Roth IRA, and taxable accounts to minimize lifetime tax.

Instructions

Plan tax-efficient retirement withdrawals. Determines optimal order to draw from Traditional IRA, Roth IRA, and taxable accounts to minimize lifetime tax.

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`age`	Yes	Your current age
`taxYear`	Yes	Tax year
`rothBalance`	Yes	Roth IRA/401k balance
`filingStatus`	Yes
`pensionIncome`	No	Annual pension income
`annualSpending`	Yes	Annual spending need (pre-tax)
`taxableBalance`	Yes	Taxable brokerage account balance
`traditionalBalance`	Yes	Traditional IRA/401k balance
`socialSecurityIncome`	No	Annual Social Security income
`rothConversionInterest`	No	Interested in Roth conversion strategy?

Output Schema

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

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed2 schema fields changedv1.2.4Nov 4, 2026
- removedInput schema / additionalProperties
```
Removed value: -false
```
- addedInput schema / properties / age / maximum
```
Added value: +9007199254740991
```

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

B3.3/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is fully covered. The description adds that the tool optimizes withdrawal ordering to minimize lifetime tax, which explains the optimization objective beyond the annotations, but it discloses no modeling assumptions or limitations (e.g., whether it projects multiple years, ignores state tax, or assumes bracket thresholds).

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 tight sentences with zero filler; the purpose is front-loaded and the optimization objective follows immediately. Nothing is repeated from the title or schema.

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 not be explained, and annotations cover the safety profile. However, for a 10-parameter financial modeling tool sitting among many overlapping planning siblings, the description leaves out the assumptions and scope (single-year vs. multi-year, tax layers modeled) an agent would need to call it confidently.

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 90%, so nearly every one of the 10 parameters is already documented in the schema, including the filingStatus enum. The description mentions the three account balances but adds no meaning beyond the schema—no explanation of how annualSpending, pensionIncome, socialSecurityIncome, or rothConversionInterest influence the recommended ordering.

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 verb and resource ('Plan tax-efficient retirement withdrawals') and names the exact account types involved (Traditional IRA, Roth IRA, taxable), so the agent knows precisely what computation happens. It stops short of differentiating itself from closely related siblings such as get_retirement_strategy, plan_multi_year_taxes, or generate_tax_plan.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

There is no explicit when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, and no named alternative. With siblings like get_retirement_strategy and plan_multi_year_taxes in the same family, an agent has to guess which planning tool to invoke; the description only implies usage through its purpose statement.

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

Deploy Server