Skip to main content
Glama
seungmiyoon

korean-tax-mcp

by seungmiyoon
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Remote

basic_rules

Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieve full text of NTS Basic Rules (국세 기본통칙) by article or keyword to get the National Tax Service's official interpretation of Korean tax statutes.

Instructions

Get NTS Basic Rules (국세 기본통칙) full text by article or keyword. 국세 기본통칙 전문(최신 고시본). 언제: 조문의 국세청 공식 해석 기준이 필요할 때. 실무 집행 기준 목록은 execution_standards, 개별 사안 해석은 rulings_by_article. 반환: {법령, 기준(고시 연도), 통칙: [{통칙(번호·제목), 본문}], 링크}. 읽기 전용. 국세법령정보시스템 공개 조회(키 불필요), 같은 요청은 1일 캐시.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
langNoOutput language. 'en': English keys and labels, official English texts where available (tax treaties, statutes), titles/summaries machine-translated by Upstage Solar when UPSTAGE_API_KEY is set. 기본 'ko'ko
articleNo법 조문('제52조'). 주면 그 조에 딸린 통칙 전부, 생략하면 전체에서 keyword로 검색
keywordNo통칙 제목·본문 검색어 (선택)
law_nameYes세법 이름(정식 명칭). 예: '법인세법', '부가가치세법', '소득세법', '상속세 및 증여세법', '국세기본법'

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed4 schema fields changedv0.4.0
    • addedInput schema / properties / article / description
      Added value: +"법 조문('제52조'). 주면 그 조에 딸린 통칙 전부, 생략하면 전체에서 keyword로 검색"
    • addedInput schema / properties / keyword / description
      Added value: +"통칙 제목·본문 검색어 (선택)"
    • addedInput schema / properties / lang
      Added value: +{
+  "default": "ko",
+  "description": "Output language. 'en': English keys and labels, official English texts where available (tax treaties, statutes), titles/summaries machine-translated by Upstage Solar when UPSTAGE_API_KEY is set. 기본 'ko'",
+  "enum": [
+    "ko",
+    "en"
+  ],
+  "title": "Lang",
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • addedInput schema / properties / law_name / description
      Added value: +"세법 이름(정식 명칭). 예: '법인세법', '부가가치세법', '소득세법', '상속세 및 증여세법', '국세기본법'"
  2. First observedv0.1.1

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint/idempotent/destructive=false, so the safety profile is covered; the description's '읽기 전용' is partly redundant. It does add real behavioral context beyond the annotations: no API key required, public 조회 on the 국세법령정보시스템, and a 1-day cache for identical requests — useful for an agent deciding on repeat calls.

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?

Front-loaded with the core action, then cleanly sectioned into 언제 (when) and 반환 (return) blocks. Every sentence earns its place with no filler.

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?

With no output schema, the description supplies the return shape ({법령, 기준, 통칙[{번호·제목, 본문}], 링크}) plus auth and caching behavior. Nothing an agent needs to call and interpret this tool correctly is missing.

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 lang, article, keyword, and law_name with examples and defaults. The description restates 'by article or keyword' but adds no syntax or format detail beyond what the schema provides; baseline 3 is appropriate when the schema does the heavy lifting.

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+resource ('Get NTS Basic Rules full text') with two access modes (by article or keyword), and explicitly contrasts itself with two named siblings. An agent can distinguish it from execution_standards and rulings_by_article without opening any schema.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

The '언제' clause gives the triggering condition (when the official NTS interpretation standard for a statutory article is needed) and names the alternatives with the condition that selects each: execution_standards for practical enforcement lists, rulings_by_article for case-specific interpretation. Explicit when/when-not/alternatives.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools