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 read-only/idempotent safety profile, and the description adds substantial behavior the schema cannot convey: inputs are declared and unverified by the server, the formula is common practice rather than statutory, 비례율 keeps changing until completion, and the caller must relay the response's sensitivity and disclosures. This is exactly the added context the annotations leave open.

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 purpose and formula, then numbered boundaries; every section carries real information. Slightly verbose with the title/description overlap and the ①②③ scaffolding, but no padding sentences.

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 carries the return burden and does so by naming the sensitivity and disclosures fields. Combined with the formula, the declared-input caveat, the volatility warning, and sibling routing, an agent has everything needed to call and present results correctly.

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 each parameter, including optionality of 비례율 and the fallback to the three project-total inputs. The description's formula shows how parameters combine into output, but adds no syntax, units, or edge-case detail beyond the schema.

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 concrete verb and two concrete outputs (권리가액, 추가 분담금) and gives the exact formulas that produce them. It also differentiates from siblings by routing formula provenance to realty_policy_rules(topic=redevelopment_rules) and eligibility questions to redevelopment_entitlement.

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 the question this tool answers ("감정평가 3억에 비례율 98%면 얼마 더 내?") and gives concrete when-to-use-elsewhere rules: go to redevelopment_rules for the formula source, redevelopment_entitlement first if sale eligibility is uncertain. It also warns that results are unstable before 관리처분인가.

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