Skip to main content
Glama

일일 현금영수증 수정

hometax__cash_receipt__daily_issue__modify
Destructive

REQUIRES prior hometax__session__login call with same account_link_id. Modify a cash receipt issued today. Get aprv_no from hometax__cash_receipt__daily_issue__search. Fields you send are sent as those values, but whether the NTS applies a changed usage, transaction type or issue means is not guaranteed (the issue-means change flag is always sent as N); fields you omit (usage, issue means, transaction date/time) are taken from today's original receipt. Tip and memo are not: an omitted tip is sent as 0 and an omitted memo as blank, so send the original's tip and memo again if it had them. When the original cannot tell whether VAT applies, the call asks for cshpt_trs_type_cd instead of guessing. 호출마다 토큰 1소진

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
tipNoService charge (봉사료). Default '0'.
trs_dtNoTransaction date YYYYMMDD. Default: the original receipt's date (only today's receipts can be modified).
aprv_noYesApproval number (승인번호)
confirmNoSet true ONLY after showing the preview to the user and receiving their explicit approval. Omit it on the first call to obtain the preview.
rcpr_tinNoRecipient TIN. Taken from today's original receipt when omitted.
trs_timeNoTransaction time HHMMSS. Default: the original receipt's time.
tota_trs_amtYesTotal transaction amount (총 거래금액, min 1 KRW, string)
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).
cshpt_usg_cl_cdNoUsage class code (용도구분코드): 0=소득공제용, 1=지출증빙용 Optional — defaults to the original receipt's value.
spst_cnfr_cl_cdNoIssue-means class code (발급수단구분코드): 01=주민등록번호, 02=사업자등록번호, 03=휴대전화번호, 04=카드번호 Optional — defaults to the original receipt's value.
cshpt_trs_type_cdNoTransaction type code (거래유형코드): 01=과세, 02=면세, 03=간이 Optional — inferred from the original receipt's VAT; asked for when it cannot be inferred.
cshpt_isn_mmo_cntnNoMemo (max 300 bytes). Default blank: it is not taken from the original receipt.
spst_cnfr_no_enc_cntnNoIssue-means number (발급수단번호) matching the class code, digits only. It is sent to the institution exactly as given - never encrypt or hash it, and never put an approval number here. Optional — defaults to the original receipt's value.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / cshpt_isn_mmo_cntn / description
      Previous value: -"Memo (max 300 bytes)."New value: +"Memo (max 300 bytes). Default blank: it is not taken from the original receipt."
  2. Added

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations say destructive true, and the description adds rich context beyond that: which omitted fields default from the original, that tip and memo are not preserved, that NTS may not apply changed usage/type/means, that the issue-means change flag is always N, and that VAT ambiguity triggers a request for cshpt_trs_type_cd. It even notes token consumption per call.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Front-loaded with the hard requirement and purpose, then behavioral details. Dense but every sentence carries actionable information; could be better structured with line breaks but not padded.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a 13-parameter destructive mutation with no output schema, the description covers prerequisites, parameter sourcing, omission semantics, edge-case handling (VAT inference), and cost. Nothing critical is missing for an agent to call it correctly.

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%, so each parameter's meaning is already documented. The description synthesizes omission behavior (e.g., usage/issue means/date/time taken from original, tip/memo not), but most of this is also in the schema. The added warning about NTS not guaranteeing changes is more behavioral than parameter-specific.

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 (Modify) and resource (cash receipt issued today), and explicitly points to the search sibling as the source of aprv_no. An agent can distinguish this from cancel and search without opening 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?

Provides clear prerequisites (prior session login with same account_link_id) and tells the agent to get aprv_no from hometax__cash_receipt__daily_issue__search. Does not explicitly state when to use cancel instead, but the verb and sibling names make it obvious.

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