Skip to main content
Glama
iseppo

e-arveldaja MCP Server

by iseppo
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

Check VAT Registration Threshold

check_vat_registration_threshold
Read-onlyIdempotent

Assess whether a non-VAT-registered Estonian company is approaching or exceeding the 40,000 EUR VAT registration threshold under 2025 rules using invoice and turnover inputs.

Instructions

Check whether a non-VAT-registered Estonian company may be approaching or exceeding the 40 000 EUR VAT registration threshold under the scope effective 2025-01-01. Facts verified 2026-07-19; source: https://www.emta.ee/en/business-client/taxes-and-payment/value-added-tax/registration-vat-payer/threshold-calculation-1-january-2025. Read-only advisory: confirmed sale invoices provide the taxable/0% turnover base, while real-estate, insurance, and financial turnover are supplied separately so the operator can decide whether they are non-incidental and count toward the threshold.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
yearNoCalendar year to check. Defaults to the current year.
financial_turnoverNoEUR turnover from financial services, e.g. non-incidental lending interest, securities/FX activity, leasing or payment services. Counts toward the threshold only when it is business turnover and not incidental; bank deposit interest, received dividends, and incidental investment disposals are normally excluded.
insurance_turnoverNoEUR turnover from insurance/reinsurance/intermediation services. Counts toward the threshold only when not incidental.
manual_bucket_sourceNoWhether the manually entered real_estate/insurance/financial/exempt/incidental buckets are already included in confirmed sale invoices. Defaults to outside_sale_invoices; use included_in_sale_invoices to reclassify parts of sale-invoice turnover and avoid double counting.
real_estate_turnoverNoEUR turnover from KMS §16(2) p 2, 3, 6 real-estate transactions/rent. Counts toward the threshold only when not fixed-asset disposal and not incidental.
exempt_social_turnoverNoEUR social-type exempt turnover such as healthcare or education. Reported separately and not counted toward the 40 000 EUR threshold.
taxable_turnover_adjustmentNoManual EUR adjustment to confirmed sale-invoice turnover. Use negative values to exclude fixed-asset disposals, non-Estonian-place turnover, or other amounts that should not count; use positive values for taxable/0% turnover not represented by sale invoices.
incidental_excluded_turnoverNoEUR real-estate/financial/insurance turnover the operator has judged incidental. Reported separately and not counted toward the threshold.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv0.29.2
    • addedInput schema / additionalProperties
      Added value: +false
  2. Addedv0.25.3
  3. Removedv0.25.2
  4. First observedv0.18.1

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already cover the safety profile (readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive, closed-world), so the bar is low, yet the description adds that the tool is advisory rather than a filing, that judgment on incidentality rests with the operator, and it provides provenance/verification date. It does not describe the shape of the returned verdict, but the added legal-date context is substantive.

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?

Three sentences, front-loaded with the core check and threshold amount before provenance and advisory notes. The long source URL is justified for a tax rule pinned to a legal effective date, and no sentence is redundant.

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 an 8-parameter tool with no required params and no output schema, the description supplies the domain model an agent needs (base turnover from confirmed sale invoices, separate buckets, operator decides incidentality) and annotations cover safety. Gaps remain: no stated return shape and no routing against get_vat_info.

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 coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3, but the description adds genuine meaning beyond the schema by explaining the model: confirmed sale invoices supply the taxable/0% base while the other buckets are supplied separately and only counted if non-incidental. That relationship between parameters is not visible from the individual field descriptions alone.

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 (check) and resource (Estonian VAT registration threshold) and pins it down with the exact 40 000 EUR figure and legal scope date 2025-01-01. It never differentiates itself from the VAT-adjacent sibling get_vat_info, so sibling routing is left to inference, but the operation itself is unambiguous.

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?

It frames the tool as a read-only advisory and explains that the operator must judge whether real-estate/insurance/financial turnover is incidental, which implies the intended context. However, it names no alternative tool and gives no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use condition, so usage remains inferred rather than stated.

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