br__validate_nfse_xml

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

The description discloses the return dict structure (valid, errors, warnings, schema_version) and schema selection behavior. Without annotations, it doesn't mention side effects, network calls, or permissions, but the core behavior is adequately described.

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 very concise—three short sentences that front-load purpose, then detail behavior and output. Every sentence adds value without redundancy.

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 no annotations, the description covers the validation logic, parameter choices, and return structure. It lacks details about performance or error handling, but is generally complete for a validation tool with an output schema.

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% for both parameters, but the description adds value by clarifying that xml_content and xml_base64 are alternatives and explaining how the root element influences validation. This goes beyond raw 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 it validates DPS or NFSe against XSD v1.01, distinguishing it from siblings like br__validate_nfe_xml. It uses specific verbs and identifies the exact resources.

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 explains automatic schema selection based on root element, providing context for when it applies. However, it does not explicitly exclude usage for other XML types like NFe, though this is implied by the tool name.

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