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 discloses that the operation is a deletion (destructive) and includes a constraint about the default workflow, adding useful behavioral context. However, it lacks details on permissions, error handling, or confirmation steps, which are important for a destructive tool, leaving gaps 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 two sentences, front-loaded with the core action and resource, followed by a key constraint. Every sentence adds value without redundancy, making it efficient and well-structured for quick understanding.

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 complexity (destructive operation with no annotations and no output schema), the description is moderately complete. It covers the basic action and a constraint, but lacks details on permissions, response format, or error cases, which are crucial for safe invocation. It meets minimum viability but has clear gaps.

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 input schema has 0% description coverage, with one parameter 'workflow_id' of type integer. The description adds minimal semantics by implying 'workflow_id' is used to identify the workflow to delete, but it does not explain format, valid ranges, or where to obtain the ID. This partially compensates for the low schema coverage but is insufficient for full clarity.

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 workflow by its ID in a Storyblok space via the Management API'), making the purpose explicit. However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like 'delete_workflow_stage' or 'delete_space', which also delete resources, so it lacks sibling distinction for 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 some context with 'The default workflow cannot be deleted,' which implies a usage constraint, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., 'delete_workflow_stage' or general deletion tools) or mention prerequisites like permissions. This gives implied guidance but falls short of explicit alternatives.

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