Storyblok MCP Server

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It states 'retrieve' which implies a read operation, but doesn't mention pagination behavior (despite 'page' and 'per_page' parameters), rate limits, authentication requirements, or what format/assets are returned. The description adds minimal behavioral context beyond the basic operation.

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 at just one sentence with no wasted words. It's front-loaded with the core purpose and efficiently communicates the basic operation. Every word earns its place in this minimal description.

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 tool with 10 parameters, no annotations, no output schema, and 0% schema description coverage, the description is severely inadequate. It provides only the basic operation without explaining parameter usage, behavioral constraints, or return format. The description doesn't compensate for the lack of structured documentation.

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?

With 10 parameters and 0% schema description coverage, the description provides no information about any parameters. It doesn't explain what 'by_alt', 'by_copyright', 'folder_id', 'is_private', 'sort_by' options, or other parameters mean or how they affect the retrieval. The description fails to compensate for the complete lack of parameter documentation in the schema.

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 verb 'retrieve' and resource 'multiple assets' with the source 'Storyblok Management API'. It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'get_asset' (singular) and 'bulk_move_assets' (mutation), but doesn't explicitly differentiate from other retrieval tools like 'fetch_stories' or 'retrieve_asset_folders'.

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 when to choose 'fetch_assets' over 'get_asset' (singular retrieval) or 'retrieve_asset_folders' (folder listing), nor does it specify prerequisites or appropriate contexts for asset retrieval.

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