XBOSS

지방세 환급 조회

wetax__tax__local__refund__query

REQUIRES prior wetax__session__login call with same account_link_id. 조회만 합니다. 지방세 환급 가능 건수와 신청·지급 내역, 처리 상태를 조회하며 환급 신청은 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_date": "<start_date>",
      "end_date": "<end_date>"
    },
    "name": "wetax__tax__local__refund__query"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`page_no`	No	조회할 페이지 번호입니다. 첫 페이지는 1입니다.
`end_date`	Yes	환급 이력 조회 종료일입니다.
`start_date`	Yes	환급 이력 조회 시작일입니다.
`status_code`	No	처리 상태 코드입니다.
`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.
`refund_type_code`	No	환급 유형 코드입니다.
`municipality_code`	No	조회할 시군구 코드입니다.
`municipality_paid_only`	No	자치단체 지급건만 조회할지 여부입니다.
`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

A4/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Adds real context beyond the annotations: each call consumes one token, the server creates an XBOSS task and stores results, and the call is therefore not purely read-only despite being a query. This is consistent with readOnlyHint=false, so no contradiction. It does not cover rate-limit behavior, permission errors, or what the stored task means for the caller, and the closing line about per-tool confirmation procedures is too vague to act on.

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 and the read-only scope are front-loaded, which is good. The idempotency block is long and repetitive relative to the rest of the description, the phrase 'anonymous taste calls' is confusing, and the final sentence about institution data changes is filler.

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 10-parameter query tool with no output schema, the description covers the prerequisite, the cost, the side effects, the scope of the result set, and the specific objects returned (count, application/payment details, status). It trusts the fully documented schema for parameter detail, which is a reasonable division of labor.

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. The description earns above that by carrying the semantics of request_idempotency_key, which the schema only defers to the description: generate before the first request, reuse only to recover a lost response, use a new key for a new execution, and keep provider idempotency_key separate. The other nine parameters, including the required date range, are left entirely to the schema.

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

Purpose5/5

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

States a specific verb and resource: it queries the count of refundable local-tax items plus application/payment records and processing status, and explicitly says it does not submit a refund application. That explicit negative distinguishes it from the sibling refunda-pplication tools without needing their schemas.

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?

Gives a hard prerequisite (a prior wetax__session__login with the same account_link_id) and an explicit not-for-use case (refund application). It does not distinguish itself from the other query siblings (due query, payment history query), so guidance stops short of full alternative routing.

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?