Skip to main content
Glama

korea-realty

by app.sallim
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

정비사업 분담금 계산 — 선언된 감정평가액·비례율로 권리가액·분담금

realty_redevelopment_burden
Read-onlyIdempotent

재개발·재건축 조합원의 권리가액과 추가 분담금을 계산한다.

재개발·재건축 조합원의 권리가액과 추가 분담금(또는 환급금)을 결정론으로 계산한다 —
권리가액 = 종전자산 감정평가액 × 비례율, 분담금 = 조합원분양가 − 권리가액.
"감정평가 3억에 비례율 98%면 얼마 더 내?"의 자리다.

경계를 지켜라: ① 입력 전부 **선언**이다 — 감정평가액·비례율은 조합 자료에서 가져와야
하고 서버는 검증하지 않는다. ② 이 산식은 법정 산식이 아니라 통용 실무 산식이며,
비례율은 관리처분인가 전엔 추정치라 준공까지 계속 변한다 — 응답의 sensitivity(비례율
±10%p 스윙)와 disclosures를 반드시 함께 전하라. ③ 산식 출처·변동 함정의 원문은
realty_policy_rules(topic=redevelopment_rules)의 proportion_formula가 진실원이다.
분양자격 자체가 불확실하면 topic=redevelopment_entitlement(갈림길 지도)부터.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
proportion_rate_pctNo비례율(%, 예: 102.5) — 조합 총회 자료·관리처분계획의 값을 선언. 없으면 아래 사업 전체 3종으로 계산한다 (허용 범위 0 초과~300)
prev_asset_value_10kYes조합원 종전자산 감정평가액(만원) — 감정평가 결과이지 시세가 아니다
total_post_asset_10kNo종후자산 평가총액=분양수입 총액(만원) — 비례율을 직접 계산할 때
total_prev_asset_10kNo종전자산 평가총액(만원) — 비례율을 직접 계산할 때
member_sale_price_10kYes받으려는 주택형의 조합원분양가(만원)
total_project_cost_10kNo총사업비(만원) — 비례율을 직접 계산할 때

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -{
-  "additionalProperties": true,
-  "title": "realty_redevelopment_burdenDictOutput",
-  "type": "object"
-}New value: +null
  2. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / proportion_rate_pct / description
      Previous value: -"비례율(%, 예: 102.5) — 조합 총회 자료·관리처분계획의 값을 선언. 없으면 아래 사업 전체 3종으로 계산한다"New value: +"비례율(%, 예: 102.5) — 조합 총회 자료·관리처분계획의 값을 선언. 없으면 아래 사업 전체 3종으로 계산한다 (허용 범위 0 초과~300)"
  3. Added

TDQS

A4.6/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already cover the safety profile (readOnlyHint, idempotent, no destruction), and the description adds substantial context beyond them: all inputs are user-declared and unverified, the formula is a practical convention rather than statutory, and the proportion rate is an estimate that keeps changing until completion. These are meaningful behavioral caveats an agent would otherwise miss.

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?

Front-loaded with the action, then the formula, then numbered boundaries, which is well structured. The opening two lines overlap somewhat (both restate the purpose), costing a little tightness, but the boundary list earns its space.

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 still tells the agent what the response contains (sensitivity with ±10%p swing and disclosures), which is exactly the information needed to present results responsibly. For a 6-param, 2-required calculation tool this is complete.

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 every parameter, including the unit convention and the role of the three optional total_* fields. The description's formula relates the parameters to each other but adds no syntax or format detail beyond the schema; 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?

States a specific verb+resource (재개발·재건축 조합원의 권리가액과 추가 분담금 계산) and gives the exact formulas (권리가액 = 종전자산 감정평가액 × 비례율, 분담금 = 조합원분양가 − 권리가액). It also frames the concrete user question it answers, making it clearly distinct from realty_redevelopment and realty_policy_rules.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Explicitly names when-not/where-else: for formula provenance and 변동 함정 go to realty_policy_rules(topic=redevelopment_rules), and if 분양자격 itself is uncertain, start with topic=redevelopment_entitlement. It also specifies the requirement to relay sensitivity and disclosures, an operational usage instruction rather than just context.

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