Skip to main content
Glama

fiscal

by br.com.brasilnfe

Encerrar MDF-e

mdfe_encerrar

Encerra um MDF-e já autorizado (evento tipo 3). Obrigatório ao final de cada transporte. Sem encerramento, novos MDF-e podem ser bloqueados pela SEFAZ.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
chaveYesChave de acesso de 44 dígitos do MDF-e a encerrar.
protocoloNoProtocolo de autorização do MDF-e original. Opcional - se omitido, o sistema localiza pela chave.
tipoAmbienteYesAmbiente do MDF-e original (DEVE bater com o ambiente onde o manifesto foi emitido). IMPORTANTE: passe explicitamente. ATENÇÃO: encerramento é DEFINITIVO - revise os dados antes. Valores: 1 - Produção; 2 - Homologação
numeroSequencialNoNúmero sequencial do evento. Se omitido, o sistema usa o próximo disponível.

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

A4/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

The description adds context about the blocking consequence but does not explicitly mention the irreversible nature of the encerramento (though the schema's 'tipoAmbiente' notes it as DEFINITIVO). The annotation 'openWorldHint' already indicates potential unknown side effects, so the description aligns but adds limited 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?

Two concise sentences, front-loaded with the core action, no redundant information.

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 output schema exists (context indicates true), the description adequately explains the tool's necessity and consequence. However, it does not describe what the return value contains, but the output schema likely fills this gap.

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 covers 100% of parameters with descriptions. The main description does not add further parameter-level meaning beyond what the schema already provides.

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 it ends an authorized MDF-e (specific event type 3). It is distinct from siblings like mdfe_emitir and other event tools, making its purpose unmistakable.

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 explicitly states it is mandatory at the end of each transport and warns that not using it may block new MDF-e. However, it does not provide explicit alternatives or when not to use it.

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