XBOSS

사업장 가입자 현황 조회

nps_edi__b1__lookups__workplace_subscribers__status

REQUIRES prior nps_edi__auth__npki_session__login call with same account_link_id. Get workplace subscribers status from NPS. 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": "nps_edi__b1__lookups__workplace_subscribers__status"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`page_no`	No	쪽 번호. 기본 1.
`member_name`	No	가입자 성명. 입력한 글자가 이름에 들어 있는 가입자만 조회합니다.
`page_per_count`	No	한 쪽에 받을 건수. 기본 10.
`account_link_id`	No	연동 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_key`	No	Optional same-request recovery key for authenticated calls; see the tool description.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedNov 15, 2026

TDQS

B3.2/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=false, and the Korean text correctly reinforces this ("이 호출은 순수 읽기 전용이 아닙니다"), so there is no contradiction. It also discloses concrete behavior beyond annotations: one token consumed per call, an XBOSS task created and its result stored, and that the provider record itself is not necessarily queried. The remaining Korean sentence about data changes is generic boilerplate rather than specific disclosure, which keeps this from a 4.

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 front-loaded, which is good, but the text is a two-language patchwork where the actual purpose gets one short clause. Filler such as "anonymous taste calls" and the closing generic sentence about 기관 데이터 변경 do not earn their place.

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?

Prerequisites, side effects, token cost, idempotency, and all parameters are covered, which is solid for a 5-parameter tool with no output schema. What is missing is any sense of the returned shape (pagination fields, status columns) for a tool whose entire value is a status report.

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, but the description adds real meaning for request_idempotency_key: it is same-request recovery only, reused solely after a lost response, and must not be confused with a provider-specific idempotency_key field. It also repeats the account_link_id-must-match-login constraint, which the schema only gestures at.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose3/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

"Get workplace subscribers status from NPS" names a verb and a resource, but "status" is vague about what is actually returned (subscriber counts, acquisition/loss dates, etc.). The purpose is also buried behind prerequisite and idempotency boilerplate, and nothing distinguishes it from near-neighbors such as the subscribers search or national_pension_premiums__subscribers tools.

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 description gives a hard prerequisite (prior npki_session__login with the same account_link_id) and detailed rules for when to reuse versus regenerate request_idempotency_key, which is genuinely useful context. However, it offers no guidance on when to choose this lookup over the sibling subscriber/premium lookups, and no statement of exclusions.

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

All XBOSS 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?