Skip to main content
Glama

APICK

by app.apick

외국인등록증 개인정보 마스킹

identity_document_residence_card
Read-only

Extract key fields from a Korean alien registration card (residence card) image and mask the last 6 digits of the registration number. 외국인등록증 이미지에서 지정 정보를 추출하고 등록번호 뒷자리 6자리를 마스킹한 이미지를 함께 반환합니다. PNG 또는 JPEG 이미지 파일 하나만 전달하면 되며, 마스킹된 이미지는 JSON 응답의 masked_image 필드에 base64로 포함됩니다. 정보주체의 동의 등 적법한 처리 근거를 확보한 경우에만 사용하십시오. [호출당 30포인트]

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
image_urlYes다운로드 가능한 https URL (허용 형식: image/jpeg, image/png) (최대 50MB)

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false. The description adds useful behavioral details: it returns the masked image in the JSON response's masked_image field as base64, and it requires a legitimate legal basis. 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.

Conciseness3/5

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

The description is somewhat redundant, repeating the core functionality in both English and Korean. While it is front-loaded with the main purpose, the duplication could be trimmed. The legal note and point cost are extra but relevant.

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 a single-parameter tool, it explains the output location (masked_image field) and the input format. However, it does not enumerate the extracted key fields or address error scenarios, which would be useful. Since there is no output schema, the description adequately fills the gap.

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 the image_url parameter including allowed formats and size. The description adds only minor reinforcement ('just pass one PNG or JPEG image file'), which does not significantly exceed what schema already states.

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 verb ('Extract key fields' and 'mask'), a specific resource ('Korean alien registration card (residence card)'), and the outcome (masked image returned). It clearly distinguishes this from sibling identity document tools like driver's license and passport by naming the card type.

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 makes clear the tool is for alien registration cards and specifies the input format and legal consent requirement. However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use it or contrast it with sibling tools (e.g., identity_document_driver_license). The context is implied but not explicitly stated.

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

All APICK toolsInspect
Try in Browser
RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A3.6/5.0
Disambiguation4/5

Most tools have clearly distinct purposes; even within families like identi_card1-5 vs identi_card_image1-5, the text-input vs image-input distinction is clear. However, the sheer number of tools and some near-synonyms (e.g., ocr_identi1 vs identi_card_image1) could cause occasional misselection, but descriptions mitigate this.

Naming Consistency3/5

Naming follows a loose verb-first pattern (check_, crawl_, download_, draw_, etc.) but includes significant deviations: bare nouns (bank_code, location, whois), numbered variants (identi_card1, identi_card_image1), and mixed prefixes (ocr_, identity_, etc.). The inconsistency is noticeable but still readable and predictable within functional clusters.

Tool Count3/5

80 tools is far above the typical 3-15, but the server is a broad API aggregator covering many independent domains (banking, ID verification, media conversion, search, LLM, etc.), so the high count is somewhat justified. Still, the sheer number makes the toolkit feel unwieldy and hard to navigate, placing it at the high end of acceptable.

Completeness4/5

Within its stated purpose as a general-purpose utility API, the toolset covers a wide array of common task families: identity document verification (text and image), OCR field extraction, media conversion, web/search, domain/IP lookup, and LLM chat. Most operations have both get and act variants (e.g., set/get watermark, parcel_tracking/auto), with few obvious dead ends for typical use cases.

Resources