Skip to main content
Glama
rehan1020

mcp-india-stack

by rehan1020
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

calculate_epf_esic

Read-onlyIdempotent

Calculate EPF and ESIC contributions for employer and employee using basic and gross wages in INR. Use it to compute payroll costs, compare CTC structures, and determine statutory obligations.

Instructions

Calculate EPF and ESIC contributions for employer and employee.

Use when computing payroll costs, employee deductions, or comparing CTC structures across different salary levels.

Args: basic_wages: Basic salary + DA per month in INR. gross_wages: Total gross monthly salary in INR. include_employer_share: If True, return employer costs.

Returns: Standard envelope with EPF breakdown, ESIC applicability, and totals.

Notes: EPF ceiling is ₹15,000/month for statutory computation. ESIC applicable when gross wages ≤ ₹21,000/month.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
basic_wagesYesBasic salary + DA per month in INR
gross_wagesYesTotal gross monthly salary in INR
include_employer_shareNoIf True, return employer costs

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed6 schema fields changedv0.5.0
    • removedInput schema / additionalProperties
      Removed value: -false
    • addedInput schema / properties / basic_wages / title
      Added value: +"Basic Wages"
    • addedInput schema / properties / gross_wages / title
      Added value: +"Gross Wages"
    • addedInput schema / properties / include_employer_share / title
      Added value: +"Include Employer Share"
    • addedInput schema / title
      Added value: +"calculate_epf_esicArguments"
    • addedOutput schema / title
      Added value: +"calculate_epf_esicDictOutput"
  2. Addedv0.4.2

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and idempotentHint=true, setting the behavioral safety baseline. Beyond that, the description adds valuable statutory context: the ₹15,000 EPF ceiling and the ₹21,000 ESIC applicability threshold. It also hints at output through 'EPF breakdown, ESIC applicability, and totals.'

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 compact and well-organized: purpose in the first sentence, clear usage guidance, argument list, return hint, and domain-specific notes. Every sentence earns its place without redundant filler.

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?

The tool has an output schema, so the return breakdown need not be restated. The description covers purpose, usage scenario, key statutory thresholds, and the employer/employee dimension. It is complete for the intended payroll-cost comparison and deduction contexts.

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?

The schema already covers 100% of parameter descriptions, so the baseline is 3. The description adds meaningful parameter-level context through the statutory limits, particularly that gross wages determine ESIC applicability and the EPF computation ceiling is ₹15,000. This goes beyond merely restating the schema.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Calculate EPF and ESIC contributions for employer and employee.' It clearly distinguishes itself from the many sibling calculators (e.g., calculate_gratuity, calculate_income_tax) by naming the exact statutory payroll contributions it handles.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

The description explicitly states when to use the tool: 'Use when computing payroll costs, employee deductions, or comparing CTC structures across different salary levels.' This is clear context but does not provide exclusions or explicit alternatives, so it misses the top score.

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