XBOSS

지방세 고지 및 미납 내역 조회

wetax__tax__local__due__query

REQUIRES prior wetax__session__login call with same account_link_id. 조회만 합니다. 지방세 고지 및 미납 내역을 조회하며 납부나 신고는 수행하지 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

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": {
      "start_month": "<start_month>",
      "end_month": "<end_month>"
    },
    "name": "wetax__tax__local__due__query"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`page_no`	No	조회할 페이지 번호입니다. 첫 페이지는 1입니다.
`end_month`	Yes	조회 종료 연월입니다. YYYYMM 형식입니다.
`tax_codes`	No	조회할 세목 코드 목록입니다. 비우면 전체 세목입니다.
`start_month`	Yes	조회 시작 연월입니다. YYYYMM 형식입니다.
`arrears_only`	No	체납 항목만 조회할지 여부입니다.
`province_code`	No	조회할 시도 코드입니다.
`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.
`municipality_code`	No	조회할 시군구 코드입니다.
`assessment_type_codes`	No	기관 과세구분 코드입니다. 1, 2, 3 가운데 고릅니다. 보내지 않으면 셋 전부(실제 조회 화면의 전체 선택)이고, 빈 목록은 거절합니다.
`request_idempotency_key`	No	Optional same-request recovery key for authenticated calls; see the tool description.
`include_automatic_payment`	No	자동납부 대상 포함 여부입니다.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedNov 15, 2026

TDQS

A4.1/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

This is the description's strongest dimension. It discloses costs and side effects the annotations cannot express: one token consumed per call, an XBOSS job created and its result persisted per request, and the explicit warning that the call is NOT purely read-only despite being a query — consistent with readOnlyHint=false. It also explains the idempotency contract in detail (when to reuse, when to mint a new key, what happens without one).

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, but the body is long and repetitive: the read-only claim is asserted twice, and the idempotency paragraph spans several sentences to convey a simple reuse rule. The mixed English/Korean phrasing and the late-arriving 'not purely read-only' caveat, which partially walks back the earlier '조회만 합니다', cost it structure points.

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 an 11-parameter tool with no output schema, the description covers prerequisites, cost, side effects and idempotency — everything needed to call it safely. The remaining gap is the return shape: with no output schema, the agent has no idea what a notice/arrears record looks like or how paging behaves beyond the page_no parameter.

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 earns above that by carrying the real meaning of request_idempotency_key — the schema entry for that parameter just defers to the tool description. It also ties account_link_id to the login call. The other nine parameters are left entirely to the schema.

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 — querying local tax notices and arrears — and explicitly excludes payment and filing ('납부나 신고는 수행하지 않습니다'), which separates it from the payment/refund siblings. It never names the nearest alternatives (payment history, refund query), so the agent must infer that boundary from the exclusion alone.

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?

The opening line gives a hard precondition: a prior wetax__session__login call with the same account_link_id. It also states the tool is query-only and explains when to mint a new idempotency key versus reuse an existing one. It stops short of pointing to a specific alternative tool when the user actually wants payment history or a refund.

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?