Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

XBOSS

by kr.xdata
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

보험료 완납증명서 신청(초기화)

nhis_edi__certificates__payment_completion__init

REQUIRES prior nhis_edi__session__login call with same account_link_id. 연동 계정으로 건강보험료 납부확인서 화면의 고지 총액과 납부 총액 칸, 가입자별 보험료 표의 열, 발급번호 칸을 받습니다. 발급은 보험료 납부확인서 발급 실행이 합니다. 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

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "nhis_edi__certificates__payment_completion__init"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
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.
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

A4.1/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Beyond the annotations it discloses real behavior: each call consumes one token, the request creates an XBOSS job whose result is stored, and explicitly that this call is not purely read-only even though it looks like a read (consistent with readOnlyHint=false). The idempotency-key semantics (new key per new execution, reuse only to recover a lost response, provider-specific idempotency_key is a different field) are genuinely useful. Docking one point for unexplained jargon ('XBOSS', 'anonymous taste calls') that muddies otherwise valuable disclosure.

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 sentences with zero waste, and the scoping constraint is front-loaded ahead of the alternative.

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 no output schema, the description compensates by naming the specific fields returned, plus prerequisite, cost, side effects, and retry behavior. Remaining ambiguity is mostly naming-level (완납증명서 vs 납부확인서) rather than missing operational information, so it is adequate for a two-optional-parameter init tool.

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 schema already documents both optional parameters and the baseline would be 3. The description goes beyond it by tying account_link_id to the login session ('same account_link_id') and by explaining the retry model for request_idempotency_key rather than just pointing at the field name.

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 concretely what the call retrieves (the notified-total and paid-total fields, the per-subscriber premium table columns, and the issuance-number field for the linked account) and names the sibling that performs actual issuance (보험료 납부확인서 발급 실행). It is somewhat blurred by the title calling this 완납증명서 while the body describes 납부확인서, and by the vague verb '받습니다', but an agent can still tell it is the data-gathering/init step preceding issuance.

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 front-loads an explicit prerequisite: a prior nhis_edi__session__login call with the same account_link_id. It also makes clear that this tool only prepares the screen data and that the sibling issue execution performs the actual issuance, which implies the ordering. It does not state any when-not-to-use condition or what happens if the prerequisite is skipped, keeping it just short of a 5.

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