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 for behavioral disclosure. 'Deletes a release' implies a destructive mutation, but it doesn't specify if deletion is permanent, requires specific permissions, has side effects (e.g., cascading deletions), or what happens on success/failure. For a destructive tool with zero annotation coverage, this is a critical 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 extremely concise ('Deletes a release.') with no wasted words, but this brevity leads to under-specification rather than effective communication. It's front-loaded but lacks necessary detail. While not verbose, it fails to provide essential information, making it inefficient in conveying tool functionality.

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, lack of annotations, no output schema, and 0% schema description coverage, the description is completely inadequate. It doesn't address behavioral risks, parameter meaning, return values, or usage context. For a deletion tool with significant complexity and safety implications, this description provides minimal helpful information.

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%, so the input schema provides no parameter descriptions. The tool description adds no information about the 'release_id' parameter—it doesn't explain what a release ID is, its format, where to find it, or validation rules. With one required parameter and no semantic details in either schema or description, this fails to compensate for the coverage gap.

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 'Deletes a release' is a tautology that merely restates the tool name 'delete_release' without adding specificity. It doesn't clarify what a 'release' is in this context (e.g., software release, content release) or distinguish this tool from other deletion tools like delete_story or delete_asset. The purpose is minimally stated but lacks differentiation from siblings.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention prerequisites (e.g., needing a release_id), consequences of deletion (e.g., irreversible action), or when to choose this over other deletion tools like delete_story or delete_asset. The description offers no usage context or exclusions.

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