Skip to main content
Glama

납부확인서 발급

si4n__payment_confirmation__issue
Destructive

REQUIRES prior si4n__session__login call with same account_link_id. This writes to the institution. The first call is not executed: it returns a preview of exactly what will be sent and a one-time confirmation_token (error WRITE_CONFIRMATION_REQUIRED). Show that preview to the user as it is. Only after the user agrees, call again with the same arguments plus that confirmation_token. Never add the token without the user's agreement. Changing any argument makes the token invalid; call without the token to get a new preview. Pick one insurance or combined for all four, then the certificate kind and period. The institution sets the password on the returned document. 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 Do not publish it.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

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_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).
certificate_kindYesInstitution code for the certificate kind.
firm_english_nameNoOptional. Company name in English for an English document.
confirmation_tokenNoOne-time confirmation token returned by the first call (error WRITE_CONFIRMATION_REQUIRED). Send it back unchanged with the same arguments to execute; it expires in 10 minutes and works once.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Added

TDQS

A4.1/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

The description discloses critical behavior beyond the annotations: it writes to the institution, uses a two-step preview plus one-time confirmation_token, invalidates the token if arguments change, and explains file artifacts, download expiry and retention. These details align with destructiveHint=true and give the agent the operational context needed to avoid unintended writes.

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?

The most important constraints are front-loaded: login prerequisite, write warning, and the preview/confirmation requirement. It is long and dense, but for a 14-parameter destructive issuance tool most of the content is operational and earns its place, though tighter structuring could improve readability.

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?

Given the tool's complexity, 14 parameters, destructive write behavior, and lack of an output schema, the description is unusually complete. It covers prerequisites, confirmation-token flow, returned artifacts, file retention, expiry recovery, and anonymous-result receipt handling.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents all parameters, including enums such as insurance and confirmation_token. The description adds some useful cross-parameter guidance, such as choosing one insurance or combined and resending the same arguments with the token, but it does not substantially extend the schema's parameter-level semantics.

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 makes clear that the tool issues a certificate/document after selecting insurance, certificate kind and period, but it never states the purpose in a clean upfront sentence. It is understandable from the title, schema and mention of 'the document the institution issued', yet it does not explicitly differentiate this issuance tool from similar certificate-issuance siblings.

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?

Usage is well covered: it requires a prior si4n__session__login with the same account_link_id, mandates a preview/confirmation flow, and explains how to retry when links expire via xdata__job__result. It does not explicitly say when to choose this tool over other certificate issuance siblings, so it falls short of full alternative routing guidance.

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