Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

XBOSS

by kr.xdata
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

직원 자격상실 가입자 조회

fourinsure__b1__member_qualification__los_member_lookup
Read-only

REQUIRES prior fourinsure__session__login call with same account_link_id. 자격상실 신고서를 쓰기 전에 성명과 주민등록번호로 가입자를 조회해 자격키(rrkey)와 보험별 기존 자격취득일·상실일, 기존 신고 여부를 돌려줍니다. 조회만 하며 기관에 저장하거나 제출하지 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

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
bpmnoNoWorkplace management number. Optional; taken from the loss form when omitted.
rrno_backNoResident registration number last 7 digits.
rrno_frontNoResident registration number first 6 digits.
applicant_nameYesMember name in Korean.
account_link_idNoAccount link ID (UUID v4). Optional — the server auto-resolves from your API key when omitted. Provide explicitly only when you have multiple certificates for the same provider. Each institution has a separate ID (Hometax != NHIS != NPS != FourInsure).
declaration_apply_dateNoDeclaration date YYYYMMDD or YYYY-MM-DD. Optional.
request_idempotency_keyNoOptional same-request recovery key for authenticated calls; see the tool description.
resident_registration_numberYes13-digit resident registration number.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / request_idempotency_key
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Optional same-request recovery key for authenticated calls; see the tool description.",
+  "maxLength": 128,
+  "minLength": 1,
+  "pattern": "^[\\x20-\\x7E]+$",
+  "type": "string"
+}
  2. Added

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint/destructiveHint, and the description adds real value on top: it explicitly states nothing is saved or submitted to the institution, that each call consumes 1 token, and that authentication must be established first. The idempotency-key prose is behavioral but generic boilerplate rather than tool-specific.

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 purpose are front-loaded well, but roughly half the text is a multi-sentence idempotency-key explanation that reads as boilerplate and could be compressed to one clause. The Korean and English sections are not merged, making the description read as two stitched-together blocks.

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?

With no output schema, the description usefully enumerates what comes back (rrkey, dates, prior-declaration flag), which is what an agent needs to chain into los_save. Auth prerequisite and token cost are also covered; only the ambiguity around which RRN parameter form to supply is unaddressed.

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 an extra point by identifying name and resident registration number as the lookup keys, which tells the agent that the remaining parameters (bpmno, declaration_apply_date, account_link_id) are ancillary. It does not resolve the ambiguity of rrno_front/back versus the single resident_registration_number field.

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 (자격상실 가입자 조회) and goes further by naming the returned fields: qualification key (rrkey), per-insurance acquisition/loss dates, and prior declaration status. This makes it clearly distinguishable from the sibling write tools los_init/los_save in the same member_qualification family.

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 an explicit workflow slot ('자격상실 신고서를 쓰기 전에') and a hard prerequisite (prior fourinsure__session__login with the same account_link_id). It does not name a specific alternative sibling (e.g. los_exist_check vs los_save), so it stops just short of full routing guidance.

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

All XBOSS toolsInspect
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