Skip to main content
Glama

APICK Business

by app.apick
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

개인통관고유부호 인증 요청

req_pccc

Request simple authentication (KakaoTalk, Toss, PASS, etc.) to retrieve a Korean Personal Customs Clearance Code (PCCC). 이름, 생년월일, 휴대전화번호와 간편인증 방식을 입력하면 해당 휴대폰으로 인증 요청이 발송되고, 응답을 기다리지 않고 tx_id 를 즉시 반환합니다. 인증 요청이 실제 발송된 접수 시점에 과금되며, 이미 대기 중인 요청을 다시 보내면 재발송 없이 기존 tx_id 를 반환하고 과금되지 않습니다. 사용자가 휴대폰에서 승인한 뒤 get_pccc 에 tx_id 를 넣어 결과를 확인하세요. [호출당 30포인트]

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameYes이름
phoneYes휴대전화 번호 (본인 명의, 숫자만)
birthdayYes생년월일 8자리 (YYYYMMDD)
providerYes간편인증 방식 (kakao, naver, toss, pass, samsung, kb, shinhan, hana, woori, ibk, nh, kakaobank, banksalad)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / birthday / description
      Previous value: -"생년월일 8자리(YYYYMMDD) 또는 주민등록번호 13자리"New value: +"생년월일 8자리 (YYYYMMDD)"
    • removedInput schema / properties / ttlMs
      Removed value: -{
-  "description": "인증 유효 시간(ms, 기본 600000, 최대 1800000)",
-  "type": "number"
-}
  2. Changed6 schema fields changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / birthday
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "생년월일 8자리(YYYYMMDD) 또는 주민등록번호 13자리",
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • addedInput schema / properties / provider
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "간편인증 방식 (kakao, naver, toss, pass, samsung, kb, shinhan, hana, woori, ibk, nh, kakaobank, banksalad)",
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • removedInput schema / properties / rrn1
      Removed value: -{
-  "description": "주민등록번호 앞 6자리",
-  "type": "string"
-}
    • removedInput schema / properties / rrn2
      Removed value: -{
-  "description": "주민등록번호 뒤 7자리",
-  "type": "string"
-}
    • addedInput schema / properties / ttlMs
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "인증 유효 시간(ms, 기본 600000, 최대 1800000)",
+  "type": "number"
+}
    • changedInput schema / required
      Previous value: -[
-  "name",
-  "rrn1",
-  "rrn2",
-  "phone"
-]New value: +[
+  "name",
+  "birthday",
+  "phone",
+  "provider"
+]
  3. First observed

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

The description discloses key behaviors beyond annotations: asynchronous nature (returns tx_id without waiting), billing at receipt, and idempotent handling of duplicate pending requests (returns existing tx_id without re-billing). This is valuable context that annotations do not cover.

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 a single dense paragraph that front-loads the purpose and then provides critical operational details. It is efficient, with no filler, though the billing and idempotency details add length but are necessary for correct use.

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?

For an action that returns a tx_id and requires a follow-up, the description covers the full call flow: what to send, what is returned, how billing works, and how to get the final result. With no output schema, this is complete and self-sufficient.

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 four parameters. The description references the parameters (name, birthday, phone, provider) but does not add semantic details beyond what the schema provides. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 ('Request simple authentication') with a clear resource ('retrieve a Korean Personal Customs Clearance Code (PCCC)') and distinguishes itself from the sibling get_pccc by explaining the follow-up step. It is unambiguous and context-specific.

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 gives clear usage instructions: inputs, immediate tx_id return, the need to wait for user approval, and how to retrieve the result via get_pccc. It also mentions billing conditions. It does not explicitly state when NOT to use it or compare with alternatives like name_rrn_auth, but the flow is well-defined.

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

All APICK Business toolsInspect
Try in Browser
One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources