SEFAZ AC: NFC-e, consulta em fonte oficial. Hospedado pela plataforma, sem credenciais da plataforma, pague por consulta com crédito pré-pago. Consulta informação de fontes e órgãos oficiais brasileiros (a mesma disponível ao cidadão), não é dado sigiloso. O cliente é o controlador dos dados e responde pela finalidade legítima (LGPD).
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| nfce | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
The annotations already communicate readOnly, idempotent, and non-destructive behavior. The description adds value by disclosing the billing model, credential requirements, public-data nature, and LGPD responsibility, which are non-obvious behavioral and business traits.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is compact and front-loaded with the most important fact: which query is being offered. Additional sentences cover credentials, payment, and legal context without making the description excessively long.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Considering the simple single-parameter schema and the presence of annotations, the description covers the query's purpose, source, payment model, and non-confidential nature. It omits the expected response shape and exact NFC-e format, but remains mostly complete for this scope.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema description coverage is 0%, and the description does not explain the expected format of the 'nfce' parameter or how an agent should provide it. The parameter name and tool name hint that it is a NFC-e reference, but the missing format is a real gap.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description begins with 'SEFAZ AC: NFC-e, consulta em fonte oficial', which explicitly names the resource (NFC-e), the jurisdiction (SEFAZ AC), and the operation (consultar). This clearly distinguishes it from generic sibling platform tools.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The description states that the tool is platform-hosted, requires no platform credentials, is paid per query with prepaid credit, and uses official public Brazilian data. This gives the agent a clear context for when to use it, although no explicit alternative or exclusion is mentioned.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.