Skip to main content
Glama

건강보험 EDI 세션 상태 조회

nhis_edi__session__status

연동 계정을 넣으면 저장된 건강보험 EDI 세션에 접속 정보가 모두 있는지와 로그인 확인 결과를 읽어 인증 여부와 업무 화면 준비 기록을 돌려줍니다. 기관 화면은 열지 않습니다. 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__session__status"
  }
}

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

B3.4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=false, and the description meaningfully reinforces and extends that: it warns the call consumes one token, creates an XBOSS job and stores a processing result, and that it is 'not purely read-only' despite being a status query. That is real side-effect disclosure beyond the annotation flags. It loses a point for burying this among irrelevant idempotency boilerplate rather than leading with it.

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

Conciseness2/5

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

The purpose sentence is front-loaded and useful, but the body is padded with copied idempotency boilerplate, including 'anonymous taste calls' and 'provider-specific idempotency_key', which have no bearing on this tool. Mixed Korean/English and irrelevant clauses make the agent work to find the operative constraints.

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?

For a session-status check with side effects and no output schema, the definition does cover what is returned (auth status, screen-readiness record) and what side effects occur (token, XBOSS job). However the stray idempotency-key template text muddies the picture and the shape of the returned records is only vaguely described, leaving gaps for a tool of this complexity.

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%, so both account_link_id and request_idempotency_key are already documented, including the server-side fallback when the link ID is omitted. The description adds little parameter meaning beyond restating that a linked account is supplied. Baseline 3 applies when the schema carries the load.

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 opening sentence names a specific resource and outcome: given a linked account, it reads whether the saved NHIS EDI session holds complete access info and login verification, returning auth status and work-screen readiness. '기관 화면은 열지 않습니다' also draws a boundary against the session__login siblings. It stops short of naming an alternative tool explicitly, so it is clear but not fully differentiated.

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?

The definition implies usage ('연동 계정을 넣으면', the no-screen-opening constraint) but never states when an agent should call this rather than nhis_edi__session__login or the other *_session__status tools. There are no explicit prerequisites or exclusions, so the routing decision is left to inference.

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