mcp-militarypay

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

Estimate Total Compensation

estimate_total_compensation

Read-onlyIdempotent

Calculate total military compensation (basic pay, BAH, BAS) with a taxable/non-taxable breakdown. Use pay grade, years of service, duty station ZIP, and dependents to get monthly and annual totals.

Instructions

Basic pay + BAH + BAS with a per-component breakdown and a tax split.

Returns monthly and annual totals separated into taxable (basic pay) and non-taxable (BAH, BAS) amounts. The ZIP code must be the permanent duty station, not the member's residence - BAH follows the duty station. This is regular military compensation only: it excludes special and incentive pays, bonuses, and all deductions.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`year`	No	Year. Defaults to the most recent loaded.
`zip_code`	Yes	5-digit ZIP code of the member's PERMANENT DUTY STATION, not their home. BAH follows the duty station, so a residence ZIP returns a different, real, wrong housing area.
`pay_grade`	Yes	Pay grade, e.g. 'E-5', 'O-3'.
`has_dependents`	Yes	Whether the member has dependents.
`years_of_service`	Yes	Cumulative years of service.
`months_active_duty`	No	Total months of active duty. Only affects E-1.
`senior_enlisted_advisor`	No	True for a senior enlisted advisor billet.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Sep 7, 2026

TDQS

A4.2/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already mark the tool as read-only and idempotent. The description adds valuable behavioral context: it returns a per-component breakdown with a taxable/non-taxable split, applies the duty-station rule for BAH, and scopes what is and is not included. No contradiction with annotations.

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?

The description is front-loaded with a compact summary of what the tool does, followed by output details, a key usage caveat, and scope exclusions. Each sentence earns its place, though the ZIP-code guidance is somewhat redundant with the schema description.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the tool's moderate complexity, rich input schema, clear annotations, and existing output schema, the description is complete. It explains the calculation scope, correct ZIP semantics, and exclusions, leaving no critical ambiguity for an agent to call it correctly.

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 100%, so the schema already documents all seven parameters. The description reinforces the critical ZIP-code semantics (permanent duty station, not residence), but this is also fully stated in the schema. It does not add meaningfully new parameter-level information beyond what the schema provides.

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 states a specific action (estimate total compensation), identifies the exact components (Basic pay + BAH + BAS), and describes the output shape (per-component breakdown, tax split, monthly/annual totals). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_base_pay, get_bah, get_bas, and get_bas.

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 provides clear usage context: the ZIP code must be the permanent duty station, and the tool covers regular military compensation only, explicitly excluding special/incentive pays, bonuses, and deductions. However, it does not explicitly name sibling tools as alternatives for single-component or excluded-pay scenarios.

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

Deploy Server