Skip to main content
Glama

회계위키 (AccountingWiki)

by kr.co.accountingwiki
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

회계위키 검색

search
Read-onlyIdempotent

회계위키 전체(기준서 문단·질의회신·감리지적사례·실무해설) 검색. 키워드와 뜻(의미)을 함께 보므로 '리스료를 깎아주면 어떻게 처리하나'처럼 문장으로 물어도 된다. 기준서 용어·문서번호는 정확히 일치하는 결과가 위로 온다. 실무 표현으로 찾은 결과가 약하면 기준서 용어로 바꿔 한 번 더 검색할 것(예: '계약 따낸 대가로 준 수수료' → '계약체결 증분원가', '앱마켓 수수료 빼고 매출' → '본인 대 대리인'). 질문에 대한 근거를 한 번에 모으려면 find_evidence 가 낫다. 결과의 id 를 fetch 에 넘기면 전문을 얻는다. 결과는 이용자 질의에 대한 조회 목적으로만 제공되며 원문 저작권은 제정·발행기관에 있다. 인용 시 응답의 출처 URL 을 표기할 것.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
stdNo기준서 번호로 한정 (예: '1116')
kindNostandard: 기준서 문단만, qna: 질의회신·감리사례만, article: 실무해설만
limitNo기본 10
queryYes검색어 (예: '리스 변경 회계처리')
domainNo도메인 필터 — 생략 시 전체 도메인 검색

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / kind / description
      Previous value: -"standard: 기준서 문단만, qna: 질의회신·사례만"New value: +"standard: 기준서 문단만, qna: 질의회신·감리사례만, article: 실무해설만"
    • changedInput schema / properties / kind / enum
      Previous value: -[
-  "standard",
-  "qna"
-]New value: +[
+  "standard",
+  "qna",
+  "article"
+]
  2. First observed

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly/idempotent/non-destructive, so the description adds ranking behavior (exact standard terms and document numbers rank higher), semantic matching behavior, and copyright/citation obligations. Missing detail on result count defaults beyond schema, but schema covers limit; strong added value.

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-loads scope then matching behavior then workflow guidance. Mostly efficient, though the copyright/citation sentence is somewhat tangential and could be condensed; overall well-structured with no true waste.

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 read-only search tool with no output schema, the description covers scope, matching semantics, ranking, alternatives, follow-up via fetch, and citation obligations. Return value shape (fields like id) is only implied but sufficient for correct invocation.

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 coverage is 100% and enum descriptions already explain kind and domain. The description adds no parameter-level detail beyond what the schema provides; 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 (검색) and scope (회계위키 전체 with enumerated content types: 기준서 문단·질의회신·감리지적사례·실무해설). Distinguishes from siblings by naming find_evidence for evidence gathering and fetch for full text.

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 says when to use it (semantic/phrase queries, exact term matching ranks higher), when to use an alternative (find_evidence for collecting evidence for a question), and gives a concrete retry strategy with examples of converting practice phrasing to standard terms.

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

All 회계위키 (AccountingWiki) 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