consultar_nfe

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It states the tool 'consults' (implied read-only) but does not disclose behavioral traits like error handling (e.g., invalid key), rate limits, or prerequisites beyond having the key. The description is minimal for safety-critical understanding.

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?

Two sentences concisely deliver purpose, input specifics, and output summary. No extraneous words; front-loaded with the core function.

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?

With an output schema present, the description sufficiently covers input requirements (key source and format) and output components. For a simple one-parameter tool, this completeness meets needs without gaps.

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 coverage is 100% with a clear description of the 'chave_acesso' parameter (44 digits, accept spaces). The tool description adds value by explaining how the key is found (in DANFE), which aids agent understanding beyond the schema.

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's purpose: consulting NFe data using a specific 44-digit access key. It specifies the source (DANFE) and lists the returned data types (emitente, destinatário, itens, valores, protocolo). This distinguishes it from siblings like 'consultar_nfse' (different document) and 'validar_chave_nfe' (validation vs consultation).

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 implies usage for consulting NFe data but does not explicitly define when to use this tool versus alternatives. It lacks exclusions or when-not-to guidance. However, the context (siblings list) and tool name make the intended use clear without confusion.

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