Storyblok MCP Server

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It states this is a deletion operation, implying it's destructive, but doesn't disclose critical behavioral traits: whether deletion is permanent or reversible, if it requires specific permissions, what happens to associated data, or error conditions. For a destructive tool with zero annotation coverage, this is a significant gap.

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 extremely concise—a single sentence with no wasted words. It's front-loaded with the core action and resource. While it lacks detail, what's present is structured efficiently 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?

For a destructive deletion tool with 1 parameter, 0% schema coverage, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It doesn't address behavioral implications, parameter meaning, or expected outcomes. The agent would struggle to use this tool correctly without additional context.

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 0%, meaning the single parameter (datasource_id) has no documentation in the schema. The description adds no information about this parameter—it doesn't explain what a datasource_id is, how to obtain it, or format requirements. The description fails to compensate for the schema's lack of 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 action ('Deletes') and resource ('a datasource from a specified Storyblok space'), making the purpose understandable. However, it doesn't distinguish this tool from other deletion tools in the sibling list (e.g., delete_asset, delete_story, delete_datasource_entry), which would require mentioning what makes datasource deletion unique.

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. It doesn't mention prerequisites (e.g., needing a datasource_id), consequences of deletion, or when to choose other tools like delete_datasource_entry. This leaves the agent without contextual usage information.

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