Skip to main content
Glama

fiscal

by br.com.brasilnfe

Inutilizar numeração

evento_inutilizar
Destructive

Inutiliza uma faixa de numeração não utilizada na SEFAZ. Útil quando há quebra de sequência por erro de emissão. Não pode ser desfeito. Operação rara - confirme com o usuário antes.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
SerieYesSérie referente ao modelo do documento. Deve ser > 0.
TipoAmbienteYesIdentificação do Ambiente. IMPORTANTE: passe explicitamente. Inutilização em produção é IRREVERSÍVEL. Valores: 1 - Produção (faixa fica DEFINITIVAMENTE inutilizada na SEFAZ); 2 - Homologação (teste)
JustificativaYesJustificativa da inutilização. Mínimo 15, máximo 255 caracteres. Descreva o motivo real (ex: "Erro de digitação - série pulada por engano no sistema interno").
NumeracaoFinalYesFinal da faixa numérica a inutilizar. Deve ser >= NumeracaoInicial.
ModeloDocumentoYesCódigo do modelo do Documento Fiscal a inutilizar. Valores: 55 - NF-e; 65 - NFC-e; 57 - CT-e
NumeracaoInicialYesInício da faixa numérica a inutilizar. Deve ser > 0 e <= NumeracaoFinal.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
ErrorNoMensagem de erro da operação. Vazia ("") quando foi bem-sucedida.
AvisosNoAvisos não bloqueantes. Pode vir preenchida mesmo em emissão bem-sucedida.
StatusNo1 - Evento Processado; 2 - Aguardando processamento do evento; 3 - Ocorreu um erro ao processar o evento
DsEventoNo
DsMotivoNo
DsAmbienteNo
NuProtocoloNo
NumeroSequencialNo
CodStatusRespostaSefazNo

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

The description adds critical behavioral context beyond the destructiveHint annotation by stating 'Não pode ser desfeito' (cannot be undone) and emphasizing the need for user confirmation. This fully aligns with the annotation and provides extra transparency.

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 consists of three concise sentences: first defines the action, second gives usage context, third warns about rarity and confirmation. No unnecessary words or repetition.

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?

Given the presence of an output schema (not shown), the description need not cover return values. It adequately covers purpose, usage, and behavioral warnings. It could mention prerequisites or side effects, but the overall completeness is high.

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?

With 100% schema coverage, each parameter already has a description in the schema. The tool description does not add parameter-level details, so it meets the baseline without compensating further.

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 action (inutilizar faixa de numeração) and the specific resource (SEFAZ). It distinguishes itself from sibling event tools like evento_cancelar and evento_manifestar by focusing on range invalidation due to sequence breaks.

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?

The description provides a specific use case ('quebra de sequência por erro de emissão') and cautions that it's a rare operation that should be confirmed with the user. However, it doesn't explicitly state when not to use it or compare to alternatives.

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

All fiscal toolsInspect
Try in Browser
RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A3.6/5.0
Disambiguation5/5

Each tool has a clearly distinct purpose, with thorough descriptions that clarify overlaps (e.g., cliente_consultar vs cadastro_consultar). Even similar operations like arquivo_baixar variants have explicit scope differences.

Naming Consistency4/5

Most tools follow a noun_verb pattern (e.g., cliente_consultar, evento_cancelar, produto_criar), but a few deviate (e.g., 'health', 'cte_desacordo'). Overall consistent enough for easy recognition.

Tool Count4/5

34 tools is high but justified given the complexity of fiscal document management across multiple document types (NF-e, NFS-e, CT-e, MDF-e, etc.) and required CRUD, events, and auxiliary operations.

Completeness4/5

The tool set covers create/read/update/delete for clients, products, and tax rules, plus emission, cancellation, correction, and status checks for various documents. Minor gaps like dedicated NFS-e cancellation are handled by generic event tools.

Resources