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 the tool uses the 'Management API' but doesn't disclose critical behavioral traits: whether deletion is permanent/reversible, required permissions, rate limits, error conditions, or what happens on success. For a destructive operation 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 appropriately sized with two sentences: a clear purpose statement followed by parameter clarification. It's front-loaded with the main action. However, the bullet point format for the single parameter is slightly verbose for such a simple tool, preventing a perfect score.

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 this is a destructive mutation tool with no annotations, no output schema, and minimal parameter documentation, the description is incomplete. It doesn't address behavioral implications, success/error responses, or integration context needed for safe operation. The agent lacks sufficient information to use this tool confidently.

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%, but the description adds minimal parameter semantics: it clarifies that 'preset_id' is a 'Numeric ID of the preset to delete'. This provides basic meaning beyond the schema's 'integer' type. However, it doesn't explain where to obtain this ID or format constraints, leaving gaps. With 1 parameter, baseline is 4, but incomplete compensation reduces it to 3.

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 preset from a Storyblok space'), providing specific verb+resource. It distinguishes from siblings like 'create_preset' or 'update_preset' by specifying deletion. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from other deletion tools (e.g., 'delete_story', 'delete_asset'), which prevents a perfect score.

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 preset ID), exclusions, or compare it to similar deletion tools in the sibling list. The agent must infer usage from the tool name alone.

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