Storyblok MCP Server

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden but only states the deletion action without disclosing behavioral traits. It doesn't mention required permissions, whether the deletion is reversible, what happens to associated data, or any rate limits. For a destructive operation, this is a significant gap in 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 perfectly concise with two sentences that each earn their place: the first states the core purpose, the second explains parameter usage. There's zero waste and it's appropriately front-loaded with the main action.

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 destructive tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description provides adequate basic information about what it does and parameter usage, but lacks crucial context about permissions, consequences, and response format. It's minimally viable but has clear gaps given the tool's complexity and potential impact.

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 beyond the schema by explaining that you can delete 'by numeric collaborator_id or by sso_id for SSO users', clarifying the purpose and relationship between the two parameters. With 0% schema description coverage, this effectively compensates for the schema's lack of parameter documentation.

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 specific action ('Deletes') and target ('a collaborator from a specified Storyblok space'), distinguishing it from sibling tools like 'add_collaborator' and 'update_collaborator'. It precisely defines what the tool does without being tautological.

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 by mentioning two alternative identifiers (collaborator_id or sso_id), but doesn't explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'update_collaborator' or 'retrieve_multiple_collaborators'. It provides some context but lacks explicit guidance on prerequisites or exclusions.

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