manifestar_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 discloses critical security behavior: the certificate is never sent to any server and the password is never logged. It also lists event types with requirements. Some server-side behavior is implied but not detailed.

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 somewhat long but well-structured, with clear formatting for event codes. It is front-loaded with the main action and includes important details like certificate handling and password security.

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 the tool's complexity (10 parameters, output schema exists), the description covers key behavioral aspects, security, prerequisites, and event types. It could include more detail on server-side processing but is generally complete.

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%, so the schema already documents parameters. The description adds value by clarifying the event codes and their meanings, but does not significantly enhance parameter semantics beyond what the schema provides.

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: 'Manifesta o destinatario em uma NF-e via NFeRecepcaoEvento.' It lists specific event codes, distinguishing it from sibling tools like consultar_nfe or baixar_nfe_distribuicao.

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 explicitly requires a local A1 digital certificate and explains that the 'Ciencia' event is a prerequisite for obtaining the full XML. It provides context but does not explicitly mention when not to use this tool or suggest alternatives.

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