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 mentions the Storyblok Management API but fails to disclose critical behavioral traits: this is a destructive operation (implied by 'Deletes'), it likely requires specific permissions, and there's no information on error handling, confirmation steps, or what happens upon success (e.g., if the role is permanently removed).

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 a single, efficient sentence with zero waste. It's front-loaded with the core action and resource, making it easy to scan quickly.

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 complexity (a destructive operation with no annotations, 0% schema coverage, and no output schema), the description is incomplete. It lacks essential details: no explanation of parameters, behavioral risks, usage context, or expected outcomes, leaving significant gaps for an AI agent to operate safely and effectively.

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%, with one parameter ('space_role_id') undocumented in the schema. The description adds no meaning beyond the schema—it doesn't explain what a 'space_role_id' is, how to obtain it, or its format (e.g., integer ID from 'fetch_space_roles'). This fails to compensate for the low coverage.

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 states the action ('Deletes') and resource ('a space role'), which provides a basic purpose. However, it's vague about what a 'space role' entails and doesn't differentiate from sibling tools like 'delete_collaborator' or 'delete_workflow_stage', which might involve similar deletion operations in the same system.

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 specific space role ID from 'fetch_space_roles'), exclusions, or related tools like 'update_space_role' or 'create_space_role' for context.

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