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 'Marks a discussion as resolved,' implying a mutation, but lacks details on permissions, side effects (e.g., notifications), reversibility, or error handling. This is inadequate for a mutation tool with zero annotation coverage.

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 front-loaded with the core purpose, followed by parameter details in a bulleted list. It's efficient with minimal waste, though the parameter explanations could be slightly more detailed (e.g., clarifying if solved_at is optional).

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 mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description covers the basic action and parameters but lacks behavioral context (e.g., effects, permissions). It's minimally viable but has clear gaps in usage guidance and transparency.

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 explicitly lists both parameters with brief semantics: 'discussion_id: Numeric ID of the discussion' and 'solved_at: Timestamp when the discussion is resolved (ISO 8601 format).' This adds meaningful context beyond the schema's basic types, compensating 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 clearly states the action ('Marks a discussion as resolved') and the target resource ('discussion'), with specific context ('via the Storyblok Management API'). However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'create_discussion' or 'retrieve_specific_discussion' beyond the verb 'resolve'.

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. The description doesn't mention prerequisites (e.g., needing an existing discussion), exclusions, or related tools like 'update_discussion' (if it exists) for partial updates.

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