Skip to main content
Glama

korea-realty

by app.sallim

모집공고 원문 쪽 읽기 — 자격 세부·유의사항 전문

realty_notice_text
Read-onlyIdempotent

입주자모집공고문 원문을 쪽 단위로 읽는다 — 팩트시트에 없는 세부(특별공급 소득·자산 기준, 부적격 처리, 계약 유의사항, 옵션 품목 상세)는 이 도구로 원문을 직접 확인하라. 표가 있는 쪽은 pdftotext 특성상 정렬이 깨질 수 있다 — 열 해석이 애매하면 단정하지 말 것.

여러 낱말은 AND로 묶인다('가점제 추첨제'→둘 다 있는 쪽). 0쪽이면 막다르지 않고 낱말별
히트 쪽과 부분일치 상위 쪽을 함께 돌려주니 그걸로 좁혀라(match='any'로 넓힐 수도 있다).
**쪽을 모를 땐 pages_only=true로 먼저 훑어라** — 전문은 한 번에 수만 자다.
전문 응답은 최대 6쪽이고, meta.matching_pages에 일치 쪽 전체 목록이 늘 들어 있다.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
matchNo여러 낱말 처리 — all=모두 포함(기본), any=하나라도 포함(넓게 훑을 때)all
pagesNo쪽 범위 직접 지정 (예: '1-3', '44'). query와 택일
queryNo찾을 키워드. 공백으로 나눈 낱말을 모두 포함하는 쪽을 찾는다(AND, 공백 무관 매칭) — 예 '가점제 추첨제', '신혼부부 소득'
pages_onlyNo참이면 본문 없이 일치 쪽 번호+발췌만 준다 — 먼저 이걸로 쪽을 고르고 pages로 좁혀 재호출하면 왕복·토큰이 크게 준다
house_manage_noYes공고 관리번호 (realty_presale·realty_notice_facts로 특정)

TDQS

A4.7/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Even though annotations already cover readOnly/idempotent/non-destructive behavior, the description adds important non-obvious behavioral details: pdftotext breaks table alignment, zero-page results still return partial-hit pages, full-text responses are capped at 6 pages, and meta.matching_pages always contains the full match list. These cannot be guessed from annotations or schema.

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 front-loaded with the primary purpose, tightly organized, and uses bold text for the most important instruction (pages_only=true) and no-result behavior. Every sentence contributes useful behavioral information without wandering off-topic.

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?

With no output schema, the description compensates well by explaining the return characteristics: maximum full-text response of 6 pages, the presence of meta.matching_pages, and the partial-hit fallback. Table caveats, the query-AND behavior, and the usage pattern for pages and pages_only are also covered, leaving no important operational ambiguity.

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 coverage is 100%, so the baseline is already high. The description adds value by linking parameters to a wider calling strategy: match='any' is recommended to widen results, pages_only=true is recommended for initial skimming, and pages is used to narrow after selecting pages. This is beyond what the schema states, but some of the information repeats schema examples.

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 clear verb and resource: the original text of the tenant recruitment notice is read page by page. It further states why it exists: to provide facts the fact sheet does not, such as special-subscription qualification details, disqualification processes, contract cautions, and option item details. This clearly differentiates it from the likely sibling realty_notice_facts.

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 strong usage guidance: use this tool for details missing from the fact sheet, use pages_only=true when page is unknown, and when no pages match, narrow using partial-hit pages or widen with match='any'. The only small gap is that the alternative tool (realty_notice_facts) is implied as '팩트시트' rather than named directly as an explicit sibling.

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
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

A3.9/5.0
Disambiguation3/5

The set has very explicit cross-tool guidance and each tool is often given a specific 'role', but there are still many overlapping clusters: auction search vs auction list vs auction detail, regional price bands vs price stats vs rankings, and court auction rate vs public auction rate. The descriptions reduce misselection, but with 51 tools including pairs like `fetch` and `realty_get_auction_case`, confusion is still likely for an agent.

Naming Consistency4/5

Most tools follow a clean `realty_` prefix and use consistent snake_case noun-phrases or verb-noun patterns, e.g. `realty_search_auctions`, `realty_get_auction_case`, `realty_presale_cost`. The exceptions are the generic `fetch`, `search`, and `report_issue`, which break the uniform prefixed convention but are only a small minor deviation from an otherwise consistent naming system.

Tool Count1/5

51 tools far exceeds the recommended threshold, even for a deliberately broad real-estate area; it is effectively an extreme number for a single MCP server. The tool count becomes the hardest usability problem, since agents must handle many tightly related micro-tools instead of interacting with a smaller, more manageable surface.

Completeness5/5

The tool set covers an impressively complete range: auction and public-auction workflows, apartment and non-apartment market, presale/cheongyak processes, tax and loan rules, subscription scoring, redevelopment, demographics, supply, POI, and even a reporting and routing tool. Boundaries and unsupported cases are explicitly documented, so there are no major obvious dead ends.

Resources