Skip to main content
Glama

ask

[KEY REQUIRED · 2 credits] 한국 법률 질문에 답합니다. 60명의 전문 리더 중 한 명에게 자동 배정하고, 인용한 조문을 law.go.kr에서 실시간 검증한 분석을 돌려줍니다. 한국어·영어 모두 지원합니다. / Ask a Korean legal question. Routes to 1 of 60 specialist AI legal leaders and returns a statute-verified analysis (real-time law.go.kr check). Korean and English.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
langNoResponse language. Auto-detected if omitted.
queryYesLegal question in Korean or English (max 2000 chars).
client_tagNo선택. client_tag: 호출자 식별용, **응답에 영향 없음**(8~64자, 영숫자·_-.). 서버 로그에만 남아 호출을 골라 세는 데 씁니다. 형식이 어긋나면 무시합니다 — 거절하지 않습니다. 질의 본문에 섞지 마세요: 본문에 넣으면 질문의 일부가 되어 분류와 검증 결과가 달라집니다. / Optional caller label (8-64 chars). Logged only; never affects the response. Invalid values are ignored, not rejected. Do not put it in the query text — there it becomes part of the question.
idempotency_keyNo선택. 재시도 안전 키(8~64자, 영숫자·_-.). 같은 키로 다시 부르면 **두 번 과금되지 않고** 보관된 답변을 그대로 돌려줍니다(24시간). 타임아웃·연결 끊김으로 응답을 못 받았을 때 같은 키로 재시도하세요. / Optional retry-safe key (8-64 chars). Retrying with the same key is never charged twice and replays the stored answer for 24h.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / client_tag
      Added value: +{
      +  "description": "선택. client_tag: 호출자 식별용, **응답에 영향 없음**(8~64자, 영숫자·_-.). 서버 로그에만 남아 호출을 골라 세는 데 씁니다. 형식이 어긋나면 무시합니다 — 거절하지 않습니다. 질의 본문에 섞지 마세요: 본문에 넣으면 질문의 일부가 되어 분류와 검증 결과가 달라집니다. / Optional caller label (8-64 chars). Logged only; never affects the response. Invalid values are ignored, not rejected. Do not put it in the query text — there it becomes part of the question.",
      +  "type": "string"
      +}
  2. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / idempotency_key
      Added value: +{
      +  "description": "선택. 재시도 안전 키(8~64자, 영숫자·_-.). 같은 키로 다시 부르면 **두 번 과금되지 않고** 보관된 답변을 그대로 돌려줍니다(24시간). 타임아웃·연결 끊김으로 응답을 못 받았을 때 같은 키로 재시도하세요. / Optional retry-safe key (8-64 chars). Retrying with the same key is never charged twice and replays the stored answer for 24h.",
      +  "type": "string"
      +}
  3. Added

TDQS

A3.7/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It explains key and credit requirements, automatic routing among 60 specialists, real-time statute verification via law.go.kr, and bilingual support. It does not disclose response format or rate limits, but it covers the most important behavioral traits for an agent deciding whether to call it.

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 compact and front-loads the most operationally important facts: key required and 2 credits. The bilingual Korean/English form is justified by the tool's advertised language support, though it does duplicate the same content. No unrelated or filler information is present.

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 single-required-parameter ask tool, the description and schema together provide the necessary context: cost, required key, language support, routing behavior, verification process, retry semantics, and caller tagging. No output schema exists, but the description's phrase 'returns a statute-verified analysis' gives a reasonable high-level return expectation. Minor gaps like exact response shape are not critical for invoking the tool 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%, and the schema entries are already rich, especially for client_tag and idempotency_key. The main description adds no parameter-specific meaning beyond the schema, such as retry behavior or formatting rules aids. It repeats that questions can be in Korean or English, which the schema already states, so the description only meets the baseline.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states a specific action and resource: asking a Korean legal question and receiving a statute-verified analysis routed to one of 60 specialist AI leaders. It is not vague or tautological, and the real-time law.go.kr verification detail adds distinctiveness. However, it does not explicitly distinguish itself from similar siblings such as ask_expert or chat_leader.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

The intended use is implied: use this for Korean legal questions in Korean or English. The description also communicates prerequisites like requiring a key and costing 2 credits. But it gives no explicit when-not-to-use guidance or comparisons to alternatives like ask_expert or chat_leader, leaving sibling selection to inference.

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

Try in Browser

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources