Storyblok MCP Server

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It states the tool deletes an access token, implying a destructive mutation, but fails to disclose critical behavioral traits like required permissions, whether the deletion is permanent or reversible, rate limits, or any side effects. This is a significant gap for a destructive operation.

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 appropriately sized and front-loaded, starting with the core action and resource. The param and return sections are structured but slightly verbose; the return statement could be more precise (e.g., specifying success/error conditions). Overall, it's efficient with minimal waste.

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 destructive nature, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It lacks details on behavioral context (e.g., permissions, irreversibility), usage guidelines, and output specifics. For a mutation tool with such risks, this leaves the agent under-informed.

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?

The description adds meaningful semantics for the single parameter 'token_id' by explaining it's 'The ID of the access token to delete,' which clarifies its purpose beyond the schema's basic type (integer). With 0% schema description coverage and only one parameter, this compensation is effective, though it could note format constraints (e.g., where to find the ID).

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 action ('Delete') and resource ('an access token from the current Storyblok space using the Management API'), making the purpose specific and understandable. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'delete_space_role' or 'delete_webhook', which also delete resources, so it doesn't fully distinguish itself in context.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as other deletion tools in the sibling list (e.g., 'delete_space', 'delete_webhook'). It lacks context about prerequisites, permissions, or scenarios where this deletion is appropriate, leaving the agent with no usage direction.

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