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

irs-taxpayer-mcp

by dma9527
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

what_changed_between_tax_years

Read-onlyIdempotent

Compare two tax years to identify bracket, deduction, credit, SALT cap, CTC, and OBBB changes, so you can understand how tax law shifts affect your filing.

Instructions

Show all differences between two tax years — bracket changes, deduction limits, credit amounts, SALT cap, CTC, and new OBBB provisions. Great for understanding how tax law changes affect you.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
toYearYesLater tax year (e.g., 2025)
fromYearYesEarlier tax year (e.g., 2024)
filingStatusNoFiling status for specific comparisons (default: single)

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

B3.4/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint=false, and a closed-world scope, so safety and repeatability are covered. The description adds the substantive scope of what is compared, but says nothing about result size, whether provisions are filtered by filingStatus, or truncation behavior. With annotations carrying the safety profile, this is adequate but not rich.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the core action and a compact enumeration of covered items. The closing 'Great for...' clause is mild marketing filler but does add a hint of intent, so it earns partial keep.

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 and the input schema is fully documented, so the description need not explain return values. What is missing is the disambiguation from compare_tax_years, which is essential for correct tool selection in a 43-tool namespace.

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 coverage is 100% and each of the three parameters is documented in the schema, so the baseline applies. The description does not explain that filingStatus narrows the comparison, even though the sibling tool get_tax_brackets presumably relies on the same concept.

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 uses a specific verb and resource ('Show all differences between two tax years') and enumerates what is compared (brackets, deduction limits, credits, SALT cap, CTC, OBBB provisions). However, it never distinguishes itself from the sibling tool compare_tax_years, so an agent cannot tell which one to reach for.

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 'Great for understanding how tax law changes affect you' implies a use case but is a benefit statement rather than a when-to-use rule. There is no mention of when to prefer compare_tax_years or calculate_federal_tax instead, which is a meaningful omission given the overlap.

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