consultar_nfse

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the tool 'orients on how to access the correct portal,' which is a behavioral trait beyond simple data retrieval. However, it doesn't mention potential issues like authentication, rate limits, or data availability that might affect execution.

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 concise, consisting of two clear sentences. It front-loads the primary action (consults NFSe data) and adds necessary context without redundancy or filler.

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?

Given that an output schema exists, the description doesn't need to explain return format. It provides sufficient context for an agent to understand the tool's purpose, the municipal variation caveat, and the guidance aspect, making it complete for decision-making.

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?

The schema covers 100% of the parameters with descriptions, so the baseline is 3. The description adds no extra parameter semantics beyond what the schema already provides; it only states the general purpose without elaborating on input specifics.

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 clearly states the tool consults NFSe (Nota Fiscal de Serviço Eletrônica) data, which immediately distinguishes it from sibling tools like consultar_nfe (for NFe). It also mentions the tool provides guidance on accessing the correct municipal portal, adding specificity.

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 includes an explicit warning that NFSe has no national standard and each municipality has its own system, indicating when this tool is appropriate and highlighting the need for municipal awareness. It also states the tool guides on accessing the correct portal, which helps an agent decide to use it over general NFe tools, though it doesn't explicitly list alternatives.

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