Skip to main content
Glama

korea-realty

by app.sallim
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

단지 평형별 전월세 시세

realty_complex_rent_by_pyeong
Read-onlyIdempotent

단지의 평형별 전세 보증금·월세 중앙값을 조회한다. 전세가율(전세÷매매) 계산의 전세 축이다.

complex_key·complex_name 중 하나는 필수. 부분일치는 동명 단지가 섞일 수 있으니
가능하면 realty_search_complexes로 complex_key를 먼저 특정하라.
행 키 supply_pyeong은 **분양평**(전용㎡ ÷ 3.305 ÷ 0.745 반올림) 기준이다.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
regionNo동명 단지를 가르는 지역 — 시군구나 **동**까지(예: '강동구', '방화동'). complex_ambiguous가 돌아오면 이 인자로 좁혀 다시 부르라
complex_keyNo정확한 단지 키 — realty_search_complexes가 돌려주는 complex_key
compare_saleNo같은 12개월 창의 **매매가를 함께 뽑아 전세가율·전월세 전환율·갭을 계산**한다(기본 켬). 종전엔 note가 '매매를 period_months=12로 따로 불러 나눠라'라고만 지시해 호출자가 손으로 했고, 창을 안 맞추면 전세가율이 수 %p 왜곡됐다 — 그 계산을 서버가 진다
complex_nameNo키를 모를 때 단지명 부분일치

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / region
      Added value: +{
+  "anyOf": [
+    {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    {
+      "type": "null"
+    }
+  ],
+  "default": null,
+  "description": "동명 단지를 가르는 지역 — 시군구나 **동**까지(예: '강동구', '방화동'). complex_ambiguous가 돌아오면 이 인자로 좁혀 다시 부르라",
+  "title": "Region"
+}
  2. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -{
-  "additionalProperties": true,
-  "title": "realty_complex_rent_by_pyeongDictOutput",
-  "type": "object"
-}New value: +null
  3. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / compare_sale
      Added value: +{
+  "default": true,
+  "description": "같은 12개월 창의 **매매가를 함께 뽑아 전세가율·전월세 전환율·갭을 계산**한다(기본 켬). 종전엔 note가 '매매를 period_months=12로 따로 불러 나눠라'라고만 지시해 호출자가 손으로 했고, 창을 안 맞추면 전세가율이 수 %p 왜곡됐다 — 그 계산을 서버가 진다",
+  "title": "Compare Sale",
+  "type": "boolean"
+}
  4. First observed

TDQS

A4.6/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already mark the call as read-only/idempotent, so the bar is lower; the description still adds valuable non-schema behavior: partial matching can conflate same-name complexes, the result row key supply_pyeong uses a precise 분양평 conversion formula, and the tool is the jeonse input to a jeonse/sale ratio calculation. These are real operational cues an agent needs and cannot infer from annotations alone.

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, front-loads the purpose and metric, and each sentence earns its place: query scope, calculation role, call prerequisite/disambiguation strategy, and row-key semantics. The bolded terms and line breaks make it skimmable without wasting tokens.

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 moderately complex tool with no output schema, the description plus the rich per-parameter schema covers the input contract, ambiguity handling, and return metric. It stops short of specifying the full response shape or units, so an agent has a small amount of runtime uncertainty, but it is enough to select and invoke the tool correctly.

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 100% and every parameter is already documented in the schema, so the baseline is 3. The description adds one piece the schema's required list does not encode: a one-of constraint (complex_key or complex_name) and a preference for complex_key, which materially improves parameter selection.

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 precise verb+resource: '단지의 평형별 전세 보증금·월세 중앙값을 조회한다', naming the exact resource (rent medians by pyeong) and the metric (median). It also states the tool's role as the '전세 축' of the 전세가율 calculation, which separates it from sale-price counterparts in the same domain even without naming them explicitly.

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?

It gives clear call-guidance: one of complex_key/complex_name is required, partial name matching risks mixing same-name complexes, and the recommended path is to use realty_search_complexes to obtain a complex_key first. This is clear context for when and how to use the tool, though it does not explicitly enumerate sibling tools to avoid beyond the implied jeonse-side scope.

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

All korea-realty 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