Reevl — Korean Real Estate

단지 상세

get_apartment

Read-onlyIdempotent

단지 하나의 전 축을 뜻이 통하는 묶음(기본·가격·전세월세·거래·등락·AI예측·입지·건물)으로 준다. search_apartments로 고른 뒤 그 cid로 부른다. 특정 단지를 판단해야 할 때 쓴다.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`cid`	Yes	단지 식별자. 예: '11290\|길음뉴타운1단지(래미안길음1차)\|길음동\|1279'

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`cid`	Yes
`web`	No	이 단지의 리블 웹페이지 주소
`name`	Yes
`units`	Yes	축 이름 → 단위·뜻 설명. 숫자를 옮길 때 이 값을 그대로 읽는다
`notice`	No	참고용 통계라는 고지. 투자 자문·중개가 아니다
`source`	Yes	데이터 출처와 갱신일
`가격`	No	매매 대표가·평단가·공시가격·시세 등
`거래`	No	거래량·수요 지표
`건물`	No	용적률·건폐율·대지지분·주차·관리비
`기본`	No	식별·위치·세대수·준공 등
`등락`	No	6·12·36개월 변동률
`입지`	No	지하철·환승·학군·공원·거주 점수
`주변`	No	초등·대학·유치원
`AI예측`	No	리블 AI 6·12·24개월 예측
`전세월세`	No	전세가율·전세총액·갭·월세 등

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedAug 25, 2026

changedOutput schema / (root)

Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "properties": {
+    "AI예측": {
+      "description": "리블 AI 6·12·24개월 예측",
+      "type": "object"
+    },
+    "cid": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "name": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "notice": {
+      "description": "참고용 통계라는 고지. 투자 자문·중개가 아니다",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "source": {
+      "description": "데이터 출처와 갱신일",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "units": {
+      "description": "축 이름 → 단위·뜻 설명. 숫자를 옮길 때 이 값을 그대로 읽는다",
+      "type": "object"
+    },
+    "web": {
+      "description": "이 단지의 리블 웹페이지 주소",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "가격": {
+      "description": "매매 대표가·평단가·공시가격·시세 등",
+      "type": "object"
+    },
+    "거래": {
+      "description": "거래량·수요 지표",
+      "type": "object"
+    },
+    "건물": {
+      "description": "용적률·건폐율·대지지분·주차·관리비",
+      "type": "object"
+    },
+    "기본": {
+      "description": "식별·위치·세대수·준공 등",
+      "type": "object"
+    },
+    "등락": {
+      "description": "6·12·36개월 변동률",
+      "type": "object"
+    },
+    "입지": {
+      "description": "지하철·환승·학군·공원·거주 점수",
+      "type": "object"
+    },
+    "전세월세": {
+      "description": "전세가율·전세총액·갭·월세 등",
+      "type": "object"
+    },
+    "주변": {
+      "description": "초등·대학·유치원",
+      "type": "object"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "cid",
+    "name",
+    "units",
+    "source"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}

First observedAug 23, 2026

TDQS

A4.7/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, covering the safety profile. The description adds genuine value beyond annotations by disclosing the all-axes bundle semantics and the hard prerequisite that the tool only works with a cid obtained from search_apartments. No contradiction with annotations.

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?

Two tight sentences, zero filler. The first sentence fronts the core behavioral contract (what it returns), and the second covers workflow plus usage condition. Every clause earns its place.

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?

Completeness is high: there's an output schema so return values need no explanation, the single required param is fully documented with an example, and the description covers the call workflow and usage condition. Nothing an agent needs to select and invoke this safely is missing.

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% with a concrete format example for cid. The description adds provenance beyond the schema: it clarifies that the cid must come from a prior search_apartments call ('그 cid로 부른다'), which tells the agent where the parameter value originates - useful semantic context the schema alone doesn't convey.

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 pairs a specific verb (준다 - gives) with the exact resource (하나의 단지 - one apartment complex) and enumerates the return scope as a coherent bundle across all axes (기본·가격·전세월세·거래·등락·AI예측·입지·건물). It also differentiates from search_apartments by framing this as the detail retrieval for a chosen complex.

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?

Names the sibling search_apartments explicitly and prescribes the workflow: choose via search_apartments first, then call this tool with that cid. It also states the selection condition ('특정 단지를 판단해야 할 때 쓴다' - use when judging a specific complex), leaving no ambiguity about when to invoke it.

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

All Reevl — Korean Real Estate tools Inspect

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

Need Help?