Skip to main content
Glama

납부확인서 발급

si4n__payment_confirmation__issue
Destructive

REQUIRES prior si4n__session__login call with same account_link_id. 납부확인서를 발급합니다. 보험 하나 또는 네 보험 통합(combined)을 고르고 증명서 종류와 기간을 넣습니다. 돌려받는 문서의 비밀번호는 기관이 정합니다. 이 도구는 기관의 기록을 바꿉니다. 첫 호출은 실행되지 않고, 전송할 내용의 미리보기와 1회용 confirmation_token 을 돌려줍니다(오류 WRITE_CONFIRMATION_REQUIRED). 그 미리보기를 사용자에게 그대로 보여 줍니다. 사용자가 동의한 뒤에만 같은 인자에 그 confirmation_token 을 더해 다시 호출합니다. 사용자의 동의 없이 토큰을 넣지 않습니다. 인자를 하나라도 바꾸면 토큰은 무효가 됩니다. 그때는 토큰 없이 호출해 새 미리보기를 받습니다. Files: the document the institution issued, unchanged, as PDF, listed in artifacts[] of the result with a download_url that works for 15 minutes; each file is kept for 7 days. If a link has expired, call xdata__job__result with the job_id from the result for fresh links. For an anonymous result, keep its private recovery_receipt and send it with the original job_id or pack_run_id to xdata__job__result. It grants access to that result only, until the original file retention expires. Do not publish it. Losing it cannot be repaired by signing up. The receipt also works if the client later signs in; it does not grant access to other results. Without a receipt, results require the original account and lane. 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": {
      "insurance": "<insurance>",
      "certificate_kind": "<certificate_kind>",
      "language": "<language>",
      "year": "<year>"
    },
    "name": "si4n__payment_confirmation__issue"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
yearYesYear the certificate covers.
usageNoOptional. Stated purpose code.
year_toNoOptional. End year for a multi-year certificate.
languageYesDocument language code.
month_toNoOptional. Last month.
insu_typeNoOptional. Institution subtype code.
insuranceYescombined issues one certificate covering all four insurances.
month_fromNoOptional. First month.
english_nameNoOptional. Representative name in English.
month_sum_itemNoOptional. Monthly summary variant.
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.
certificate_kindYesInstitution code for the certificate kind.
firm_english_nameNoOptional. Company name in English for an English document.
confirmation_tokenNo첫 호출이 돌려준 1회용 확인 토큰입니다(오류 WRITE_CONFIRMATION_REQUIRED). 같은 인자에 이 값을 그대로 넣어 다시 호출하면 실행됩니다. 10분 뒤 만료되고 한 번만 쓸 수 있습니다.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Adds substantial behavior beyond the annotations: the preview/confirm handshake, single-use 10-minute token, token invalidation on any argument change, 15-minute download_url, 7-day file retention, and institution-set document password. Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, and the description is consistent with them ('이 도구는 기관의 기록을 바꿉니다'), but a large block about anonymous recovery_receipt and job_id appears to be generic platform boilerplate not clearly scoped to this tool, muddying the signal.

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?

Front-loaded correctly with the REQUIRES prerequisite and the confirm flow, but the middle section drifts into long artifact/recovery_receipt/job_id text that reads as copy-pasted platform text and mixes Korean and English. Roughly a third of the length does not earn its place for this specific tool.

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?

For a 14-parameter destructive tool with no output schema, the definition covers the risky parts well: side effects, confirmation handshake, token lifetime, and the shape of the returned artifact/download_url. Minor gaps remain around what a preview contains and error cases other than WRITE_CONFIRMATION_REQUIRED.

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% with all 14 params documented, including the confirmation_token semantics and the combined enum explanation, so the schema already carries most meaning. The description adds only the high-level framing (choose one or combined insurance, supply kind and period), not new per-parameter detail.

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?

States a specific verb and resource (issue a payment-confirmation certificate / 납부확인서를 발급합니다) and names the scope choice (one insurance vs combined) plus the certificate kind and period inputs. It is clearly distinguishable from siblings such as the payment inquiry or login tools, though it never names a directly competing issuance tool.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

Gives an explicit prerequisite (prior si4n__session__login with the same account_link_id) and an explicit two-step protocol: the first call only previews and returns a WRITE_CONFIRMATION_REQUIRED token, and the second call executes. It also states the when-not (never add the token without user consent) and names the fallback path (xdata__job__result with job_id) for expired download links.

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