Lista as empresas (CNPJs) conectadas a este install e a situação de cada uma (company_id, razão social, município, validade do certificado).
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and idempotentHint=true, which the description does not contradict. The description adds context about the returned fields but does not disclose additional behavioral traits such as pagination, performance, or error handling. Given the annotations, the description provides adequate but not extensive transparency.
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 one concise sentence with no wasted words. It front-loads the purpose and efficiently conveys the tool's action and output.
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?
For a simple list operation with no parameters and no output schema, the description covers the main aspects: what is listed (connected companies) and what fields are returned. It could mention if the result is an array or object, but overall it is fairly complete given the tool's simplicity.
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?
There are no parameters, and schema description coverage is 100%. The description adds meaning beyond the empty schema by explaining what the tool returns (a list of companies with specific fields). This is valuable context.
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 verb 'Lista' (lists) and the specific resource 'empresas (CNPJs) conectadas a este install', with explicit output fields (company_id, razão social, município, validade do certificado). It distinguishes from sibling tools like notafiscal_listar_nfse which list NFSes, not companies.
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 implies usage when one needs to see the connected companies, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives or specify any prerequisites or context. No exclusions are mentioned.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Tools like 'marketplace' and 'toolkit_info' have overlapping functionality regarding installed MCPs and tool listing, potentially confusing an agent. Similarly, 'authenticate' and 'connect' both handle authentication aspects. However, the notafiscal tools are clearly distinct by operation.
The tools mostly follow a snake_case convention, and the notafiscal tools share a consistent prefix ('notafiscal_'). Minor deviations exist (e.g., 'notafiscal_empresas' uses a noun instead of a verb), but overall the pattern is predictable.
With 12 tools covering both a generic MCP marketplace and a specific invoice service, the count is well-scoped. Each tool serves a clear purpose without unnecessary bloat or gaps.
The notafiscal tools cover the main CRUD lifecycle (emit, consult, list, cancel, download) and the marketplace tools cover discovery, installation, and account management. Minor gaps exist (e.g., no tool to update an invoice or manage user accounts), but the core workflows are supported.