Skip to main content
Glama

홈택스 원천세 수정신고 접수증 조회

hometax__tax__withholding__amendment_report__receipt

REQUIRES prior hometax__session__login call with same account_link_id. 제출한 원천세 수정신고의 접수번호와 접수일을 조회합니다. 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": {
      "source_job_id": "<source_job_id>",
      "expected_snapshot_hash": "<expected_snapshot_hash>"
    },
    "name": "hometax__tax__withholding__amendment_report__receipt"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
source_job_idYes이어서 진행할 이전 단계 작업의 job_id 를 그대로 입력합니다(job_ 으로 시작하는 작업 번호). 접수 결과를 찾을 신고서의 작업이면 작성 상태는 묻지 않으므로 제출(submit) 결과나, 제출 결과를 확인하지 못했을 때는 미리보기(preview) 결과를 입력합니다. 같은 조직과 환경, 같은 기관 연결에서 이 신고 유형으로 성공한 작업이어야 하고 아니면 진행하지 않고 거절합니다.
account_link_idNo연동 ID(UUID v4). 선택 입력입니다. 비워 두면 서버가 API 키로 연동을 찾아 씁니다. 같은 기관에 인증서를 여러 개 연동했을 때만 직접 입력해 주세요. 기관마다 ID 가 다릅니다.
expected_snapshot_hashYessource_job_id 작업 결과의 snapshot_hash 를 그대로 입력합니다(소문자 16진수 64자리). 그 작업의 내용과 맞지 않으면 진행하지 않고 작성 내용이 바뀌었다는 오류(409)로 거절합니다.
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

A3.9/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already state readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint=false, and the description reconciles with them by explicitly saying the call is not purely read-only despite being a lookup. It adds behavior the annotations do not cover: one token is consumed per call, an XBOSS job is created and its result stored, and full request_idempotency_key semantics are explained, including recovery on a lost response versus a new execution. The closing sentence about provider changes following per-tool procedures is vague boilerplate rather than concrete disclosure.

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 prerequisite is correctly front-loaded, and the idempotency guidance, while thorough, is a dense run-on that mixes English and Korean with the purpose statement. The final sentence about institutional data changes applying per-tool procedures is filler that adds no actionable information.

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?

With 4 parameters, 100% schema coverage, annotations present, and no output schema, the description covers what the tool returns (receipt number and date), the login prerequisite, the cost per call, and the idempotency contract. It does not mention the failure mode when the referenced source job has no receipt yet, which would be the main remaining gap for an agent calling this after submission.

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 the baseline is 3. The description earns an extra point because it explains the request_idempotency_key behavior that the schema delegates to it ("see the tool description"): generate and save it before the first request, reuse it only to recover a lost response, and use a new key for a new execution. It also clarifies that the provider-specific idempotency_key is a distinct field, which prevents a realistic mistake.

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 states a specific verb and resource: it looks up the receipt number (접수번호) and receipt date (접수일) of an already-submitted withholding amendment report (원천세 수정신고). Because it names the report type, an agent can distinguish it from the sibling receipt tools for late reports and delete requests. It does not explicitly compare itself with those siblings, so it falls short of a 5.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

It gives an explicit prerequisite: a prior hometax__session__login call with the same account_link_id. The purpose sentence also establishes the timing context, namely that the report has already been submitted. What is missing is any exclusion or alternative, such as whether to use the late_report or delete_request receipt tool instead.

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