validar_assinatura_nfe

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It describes the verification process, certificate extraction, and optional CA bundle chain validation. It does not explicitly state read-only behavior, but the actions are inherently read-only. Could be improved by stating no side effects.

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?

Three sentences, front-loaded with primary function. Every sentence provides essential information without redundancy. Excellent conciseness.

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 (signature validation, certificate extraction), the description is complete. It covers optional chain validation and assumes output schema explains return values. No gaps identified.

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%, but description adds meaningful context: xml_content is validated against XXE, and ca_bundle must be PEM content, not a path. This exceeds the schema descriptions.

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?

Description clearly states it validates XMLDSig signature of NF-e, verifies DigestValue and cryptographic signature, and extracts certificate data. This is distinct from sibling tools like validar_chave_nfe or validate_nfe_full.

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?

Implies usage when needing signature validation of NF-e, but does not explicitly differentiate from alternatives like validate_nfe_full or when not to use this tool. No mention of prerequisites or context.

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