Skip to main content
Glama
seungmiyoon

korean-tax-mcp

by seungmiyoon
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Remote

compare_with_case

Read-only

Compare facts and arguments against Korean tax rulings and precedents to determine support, contradiction, or distinction for each item. Use before tax objections or opinions.

Instructions

Check your facts and argument against rulings: supports / contradicts / distinguish. 사실관계·논리를 해석·판례와 대조해 항목마다 지지·반대·구별 필요를 판정. 언제: 주장의 근거와 반대 사례를 한 번에 점검할 때(의견서·불복 검토). 단순 검색은 search_tax_rulings. 반환: {해석: [{문서번호, 구분, 관계, 이유, 사실관계 차이, 링크}], 요약, 주의}. 문서번호는 검색 결과에 있는 것만. 읽기 전용. Upstage Solar 호출 — 환경변수 UPSTAGE_API_KEY 필요(호출마다 토큰 비용), 약 10초.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
taxNo세목 필터 (선택)
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
factsYes사실관계: 누가·언제·무엇을·얼마 (최대 1500자 사용)
our_viewYes우리 주장: 과세 논리 또는 납세자 주장 한두 문장

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed5 schema fields changedv0.4.0
    • addedInput schema / properties / facts / description
      Added value: +"사실관계: 누가·언제·무엇을·얼마 (최대 1500자 사용)"
    • 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 / our_view / description
      Added value: +"우리 주장: 과세 논리 또는 납세자 주장 한두 문장"
    • changedInput schema / properties / tax / anyOf
      Previous value: -[
-  {
-    "type": "string"
-  },
-  {
-    "type": "null"
-  }
-]New value: +[
+  {
+    "enum": [
+      "법인",
+      "부가",
+      "소득",
+      "양도",
+      "상증",
+      "국기",
+      "국징",
+      "조특",
+      "국조",
+      "종부"
+    ],
+    "type": "string"
+  },
+  {
+    "type": "null"
+  }
+]
    • addedInput schema / properties / tax / description
      Added value: +"세목 필터 (선택)"
  2. First observedv0.1.1

TDQS

A4.6/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the annotations (readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint=false, destructiveHint=false) the description discloses that it is read-only, invokes Upstage Solar requiring the UPSTAGE_API_KEY env var, incurs token cost per call, and takes ~10 seconds. It also constrains output ('문서번호는 검색 결과에 있는 것만'), which is behavioral context the annotations cannot carry.

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 and labeled (purpose, 언제, 반환, cost), so it is easy to scan. The English and Korean first sentences are near-duplicates, which adds length, but every section earns its place.

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 tool with no output schema, the description supplies the return shape ({해석, 요약, 주의}), the cost/latency/API-key requirements, and the read-only nature. Nothing an agent needs to call it 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 tax, lang, facts, and our_view, including the 1500-char limit and enum values. The description adds little parameter-level meaning beyond the schema, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 (대조/판정) and resource (해석·논리 vs 판례), and the scope is per-item adjudication into 지지/반대/구별. It explicitly contrasts itself with the sibling search_tax_rulings ('단순 검색은 search_tax_rulings'), so an agent can separate the two 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 Guidelines5/5

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

The '언제' line names the concrete trigger (점검 근거와 반대 사례를 한 번에, 의견서·불복 검토) and the alternative for plain retrieval (search_tax_rulings). Both when-to-use and when-not are given explicitly.

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