budongsan-tax

Inheritance tax (상속세)

calc_inheritance_tax

Read-onlyIdempotent

Calculate Korean inheritance tax (상속세) with spouse and lump-sum deductions, progressive rates, and optional penalty (가산세) computation.

Instructions

Korea inheritance tax (상속세): basic, spouse and lump-sum deductions, progressive rates (estate basis).

상속세를 계산한다 (상증세법 §18~§26 — 9·11차 순회 법문 확정 상수 사용, 유산세 방식).

taxable_value: 상속세 과세가액(상속재산 + 사전증여 합산 − 공과금·채무·장례비 차감 후).
배우자공제(§19): min(실제 상속받은 금액, 법정지분 한도, 30억)이되 최소 5억 —
spouse_actual_inheritance·spouse_legal_share_cap(법정상속분×과세가액, 모르면 0=미적용)
입력. 배우자 단독상속은 일괄공제 불가(§21 단서) — use_lump_sum_deduction=False로.
cohabit_house_deduction: 동거주택 상속공제(§23의2 — 직계비속 10년 동거, 100%·한도 6억).
generation_skip_portion: 세대생략(손자녀 등) 귀속 비율 0~1 — 그 몫의 산출세액에 30%
(미성년+20억 초과 40%) 할증(§27, 대습상속 제외).

⚠️미지원(플래그): 금융재산공제(§22 — 미순회)·가업/영농상속공제·단기재상속 세액공제(§30)·
상속개시 6개월 내 양도 시 시가 평가 연동. 인적공제 개별 계산 대신 일괄 5억이 기본.

penalty(선택, 2026-10-13): 가산세를 함께 계산할 사실 dict — {"상속개시일": "YYYY-MM-DD"(필수), "신고세액": 기한 내 신고한
납부세액(없으면 무신고), "기한내납부세액", "납부일", "납부고지일", "지정납부기한", "부정행위", "정당한사유",
"감면유형"("수정신고"|"기한후신고"), "신고일", "과소신고사유", "납부지연_제외사유"}. 주면 결과에 '결정기준_납부세액'·
'가산세'·'가산세_내역'·'총부담세액'이 붙는다(국세기본법 §47의2~§48·상증법 §67·§78 노드). 안 주면 종전 출력 그대로.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`year`	Yes
`penalty`	No
`taxable_value`	Yes
`other_deductions`	No
`filing_credit_rate`	No
`over_2b_minor_skip`	No
`spouse_legal_share_cap`	No
`use_lump_sum_deduction`	No
`cohabit_house_deduction`	No
`generation_skip_portion`	No
`spouse_actual_inheritance`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Oct 15, 2026

TDQS

A3.7/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare this as a safe, read-only, idempotent, non-destructive computation, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuinely valuable behavioral context beyond that: the ⚠️미지원 section explicitly lists unsupported features (금융재산공제 §22, 가업/영농상속공제, 단기재상속 세액공제 §30, post-death valuation linkage) and states the default assumption (일괄 5억). This tells the agent exactly where the tool's results stop being reliable.

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

Conciseness3/5

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

The purpose statement is front-loaded and the parameter notes are grouped logically, but the body is dense and mixes Korean and English with symbolic markers, and several clauses are terse enough to require re-reading. Given 0% schema coverage the length is largely justified, but formatting could be tighter and more uniformly scannable.

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?

For an 11-parameter tool with no output schema and no schema descriptions, the description covers the consequential parameters and conditionally reveals the penalty-mode output keys (결정기준_납부세액, 가산세, 가산세_내역, 총부담세액). However, four parameters remain unexplained and the default (non-penalty) output shape is never described, leaving an agent unable to interpret normal results without experimentation.

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 0%, so the description carries the full burden, and it does substantial work: it defines taxable_value (과세가액 derivation), spouse_actual_inheritance / spouse_legal_share_cap (§19 min rule), use_lump_sum_deduction (§21 단서 caveat), cohabit_house_deduction (§23의2 limits), generation_skip_portion (0~1 with 30%/40% surcharge), and gives an exceptionally detailed key-by-key spec for the penalty dict. It still leaves year, other_deductions, filing_credit_rate, and over_2b_minor_skip entirely undocumented, so it does not fully compensate for the coverage gap.

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 opening sentence names a specific verb+resource ('Korea inheritance tax (상속세)') and enumerates the mechanisms it covers (basic, spouse, lump-sum deductions, progressive rates, estate basis). The 'estate basis (유산세 방식)' qualifier and the Korean-language restatement clearly separate it from sibling tax calculators such as calc_gift_tax and calc_transfer_tax.

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 or routing to alternatives among the many tax/judge siblings. The only conditional guidance provided concerns the optional 'penalty' argument ('주면 … 안 주면 종전 출력 그대로'), which is parameter-level behavior, not tool selection. An agent still has to infer whether to use this tool versus calc_gift_tax or the judge_* nodes.

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

Deploy Server

Inheritance tax (상속세)

Instructions

Input Schema

Schema Changelog

TDQS

Other Tools