Skip to main content
Glama

전문가 검토 포인트 추출

flag_expert_review_points
Read-onlyIdempotent

Generate expert review points for real estate contracts using context tags. Helps identify critical checkpoints based on transaction type, user role, and dates.

Instructions

context 태그를 기준으로 전문가 재확인 포인트를 반환합니다.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
stageNo문서 또는 단계 구분.
regionNo시/군/구 수준까지만 허용. 상세주소 금지.
contextYes전문가 검토 트리거용 문맥 태그.
user_roleYes사용자 역할. buyer 또는 tenant.
closing_dateNoYYYY-MM-DD 형식의 잔금일.
current_dateNoYYYY-MM-DD 형식의 기준일.
move_in_dateNoYYYY-MM-DD 형식의 입주일.
contract_dateNoYYYY-MM-DD 형식의 계약일.
calendar_styleNo캘린더 출력 스타일.
lease_end_dateNoYYYY-MM-DD 형식의 임대차 종료일.
transaction_typeYes거래 유형. home_purchase, lease_jeonse, lease_monthly 중 하나.
deposit_amount_rangeNo정확한 액수 대신 범위 문자열.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
okYes
dataNo
errorNo
unknownsYes
disclaimerYes
expert_review_pointsYes
source_status_summaryYes
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already indicate read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive behavior. The description adds that it returns points based on context tags, which is some additional behavioral context but does not disclose any side effects or other traits.

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

Conciseness5/5

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

The description is a single, clear sentence with no unnecessary words. Every part contributes to understanding the tool's purpose.

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

Completeness2/5

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

Given the complexity of 12 parameters (3 required) and the existence of an output schema, the description is too minimal. It does not explain how other parameters like stage, region, or dates affect the output, leaving significant gaps for an agent.

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?

The input schema has 100% description coverage, so each parameter is already documented. The tool description adds no extra meaning beyond what the schema provides, meeting the baseline expectation.

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 clearly states that the tool returns expert review points based on context tags. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like calendar items or checklists, but the term 'expert review points' is not further elaborated.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There is no mention of prerequisites, when not to use it, or how it fits into a workflow.

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/inhoinno86-hub/kakao_mcp_checktime'

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