Previsualizar emissão

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true. The description adds behavioral context: it only works for a competência that has been loaded ('já carregada'), and it does not send data to the provider. No contradictions found.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with 'DRY-RUN' for immediate clarity. Every sentence adds value: first states what it does, second states when to use it. No filler.

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 output schema, the description lists key return fields (tomador, valor, discriminação, código de serviço). It mentions the prerequisite of an already loaded competência. The limite parameter is covered by the schema. Some may want pagination details, but overall sufficient for a preview 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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, with both competencia and limite having descriptions. The description adds context that competencia must be 'já carregada', but this is implicit from the schema's description. No additional parameter details 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 performs a dry-run, assembling a table of what will be issued (tomador, valor, discriminação, código de serviço) for a given competência, without sending to the provider. This distinguishes it clearly from sibling tools like emitir_nfse (actual emission) and consultar_status.

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 says 'Use para o usuário conferir e confirmar antes de emitir,' indicating the primary use case is before issuance. It also notes it's a dry-run without sending to provider. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or provide alternatives, so it's slightly below maximum.

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