br__submit_nfse

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

Describes critical behaviors: irreversibility, confirmation gate, and unverified endpoint. No annotations provided, so description fully bears the burden. Also specifies return fields (cStat, xMotivo, nfse_xml).

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?

Concise and front-loaded with the main purpose. Includes necessary warnings in a separate block. No fluff, but the warning could be slightly more integrated. Still efficient.

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?

Covers all essential aspects: main action, irreversibility, two-step confirmation, input alternatives, environment parameter, optional endpoint override, and response fields. No output schema provided, but description sufficiently documents returns. Complete for a complex submission tool.

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?

All parameters have detailed descriptions in the schema (100% coverage). The description adds value by clarifying the mutual exclusivity of xml_content and xml_base64, and the role of confirmation_token. Baseline is 3; the additional context justifies a 4.

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?

Clearly states the action: submit a signed DPS to ADN to generate the NFS-e. Distinguishes from siblings like br__sign_nfse and br__generate_nfse by specifying 'assinado' (signed) and mentioning the ADN submission step.

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?

Explicitly notes irreversibility in production and a two-step confirmation process. Suggests disabling the tool with BR_READ_ONLY=1. Provides a warning about the endpoint being unverified. Could be clearer about when to use vs. alternatives, but the context implies usage after signing.

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