Skip to main content
Glama
coding-realtor

Korea Building Register MCP

get_building_recap_title_info

Retrieve comprehensive building registry data from South Korea, including land area, floor area, coverage ratio, usage, parking details, and energy efficiency ratings for property analysis and verification.

Instructions

건축물대장 총괄표제부를 조회합니다.

총괄표제부의 지번주소 및 새주소, 대지면적, 건축면적, 연면적, 건폐율, 용적율,
용도, 주차방식 및 주차대수, 부속건축물의 면적, 허가관리기관, 에너지관련 등급 등의 정보를 제공합니다.

Args:
    sigungu_cd: 시군구코드 (5자리, 예: 11110 = 서울 종로구)
    bjdong_cd: 법정동코드 (5자리, 예: 10100)
    plat_gb_cd: 대지구분코드 (0: 대지, 1: 산, 2: 블록)
    bun: 번 (4자리, 예: 0001)
    ji: 지 (4자리, 예: 0000)
    mgm_bldrgst_pk: 관리건축물대장PK
    page_no: 페이지 번호 (기본값: 1)
    num_of_rows: 한 페이지 결과 수 (기본값: 100)

Returns:
    Dictionary containing:
    - items: 총괄표제부 정보 목록 (대지면적, 건축면적, 연면적, 건폐율, 용적률, 주차대수, 에너지효율등급 등)
    - page_no: 현재 페이지 번호
    - num_of_rows: 페이지당 결과 수
    - total_count: 전체 결과 수

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
sigungu_cdNo
bjdong_cdNo
plat_gb_cdNo
bunNo
jiNo
mgm_bldrgst_pkNo
page_noNo
num_of_rowsNo

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes
Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden. It implies this is a read-only operation through the Korean term '조회합니다' (retrieves/reads), but doesn't explicitly state safety characteristics. It does reveal pagination behavior through the page_no and num_of_rows parameters and return structure, but doesn't mention rate limits, authentication needs, or potential error conditions.

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 description is well-structured with clear sections: purpose statement, data returned, parameters, and return format. While comprehensive, it's efficient with minimal redundancy. The parameter explanations are detailed but necessary given the poor schema coverage. The front-loaded purpose statement immediately communicates the tool's function.

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 complex tool with 8 parameters, 0% schema description coverage, no annotations, but with output schema, the description does an excellent job compensating. It explains all parameters thoroughly, describes the return structure in detail, and clarifies what data is returned. The main gap is lack of guidance on when to use this versus sibling tools, but otherwise provides substantial context.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters5/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

With 0% schema description coverage (titles only provide parameter names without meaning), the description fully compensates by providing detailed parameter explanations in the Args section. Each parameter gets clear Korean descriptions with format examples (e.g., '시군구코드 (5자리, 예: 11110 = 서울 종로구)'), making the 8 parameters fully understandable despite the schema's lack of descriptions.

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?

The description clearly states the specific action ('조회합니다' - retrieves/reads) and resource ('건축물대장 총괄표제부' - building registry comprehensive title information), and provides a detailed list of the specific information returned. It distinguishes itself from siblings by focusing on comprehensive title information rather than specific aspects like floor outlines, house prices, or exposure information.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus the many sibling tools (11 alternatives). It doesn't explain what differentiates this comprehensive title information from other building registry queries, nor does it mention prerequisites, required parameters, or typical use cases for this specific data.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/coding-realtor/building-register-mcp'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server