Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

XBOSS

by kr.xdata
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

서식 상세 조회

fourinsure__b1__resources__forms__detail

No credential or login required. Get form detail. For an authenticated call, generate and save request_idempotency_key before the first request. Reuse it with the same arguments only to recover that request after a lost response; use a new key for a new execution. Without it, calling again remains a new request. This optional key is not available to anonymous taste calls. Keep any provider-specific idempotency_key unchanged; it is a different field. 호출마다 토큰 1소진 요청 처리 시 XBOSS 작업을 생성하고 처리 결과를 저장합니다. 기관 원본의 조회 여부와 별개로 이 호출은 순수 읽기 전용이 아닙니다. 기관 데이터 변경은 도구별 실행 내용과 기존 확인 절차를 따릅니다.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "bbs_id": "<bbs_id>",
      "pst_sn": "<pst_sn>"
    },
    "name": "fourinsure__b1__resources__forms__detail"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
bbs_idYesBoard ID (게시판 ID). Obtain from forms.list.
pst_snYesPost serial number (게시 일련번호). Obtain from forms.list.
request_idempotency_keyNoOptional same-request recovery key for authenticated calls; see the tool description.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A3.6/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With annotations already declaring readOnlyHint=false, the description explains the counterintuitive reason: each call consumes a token, creates a XBOSS job and stores a result, so it is not a pure read even though it retrieves a form. That adds real value beyond the annotations. It stops short of saying what the job/result means for callers or what happens on failure.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness3/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The key facts are front-loaded, but the middle is repetitive ("Without it, calling again remains a new request" restates the prior sentence) and includes a garbled phrase ("anonymous taste calls") plus duplicated Korean boilerplate about institutional changes that is not specific to this tool.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

All three parameters are documented and there is no output schema, yet the description never indicates what a "form detail" actually returns (body, fields, attachment links) or how to fetch attachments. The idempotency and cost disclosure is thorough, so the gap is mainly in the return-value expectations.

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%, so baseline is 3, but the description meaningfully expands request_idempotency_key beyond its one-line schema entry: generate before the first request, reuse only to recover a lost response, use a fresh key for new executions, and do not confuse it with a provider-specific idempotency_key. The bbs_id/pst_sn parameters get no discussion, but the schema already covers them.

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?

"Get form detail" gives a specific verb plus resource, and the title (서식 상세 조회) reinforces it. It does not distinguish this from siblings such as forms__list or forms__attachments, so an agent must infer that this returns a single form given bbs_id/pst_sn.

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?

Usage is only implied: the schema says the identifiers come from forms.list, which suggests list-then-detail. The description itself gives no explicit when-to-use, when-not, or pointer to forms__attachments for files, and never names an alternative tool.

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

All XBOSS 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