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 but offers minimal behavioral insight. It mentions retrieval but doesn't disclose critical traits like whether it's read-only, requires authentication, has rate limits, returns paginated results, or handles errors. This is inadequate for a tool with three parameters and no output schema.

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, straightforward sentence with no wasted words, making it appropriately concise. However, it's front-loaded with basic information but lacks depth, which limits its effectiveness despite the efficient structure.

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 (3 parameters, 0% schema coverage, no output schema, no annotations), the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain parameter usage, return values, or behavioral aspects, leaving significant gaps for the agent to operate effectively in this context.

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%, and the description adds no information about the three parameters (datasource_id, datasource_slug, dimension). It doesn't explain their roles, relationships, or how they affect retrieval, failing to compensate for the lack of schema documentation.

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 ('retrieves') and resource ('multiple datasource entries') with context ('from a specified Storyblok space'), which is clear but basic. It doesn't differentiate from sibling tools like 'retrieve_single_datasource_entry' or 'retrieve_multiple_datasources', leaving the scope vague regarding what 'multiple' entails or how it differs.

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. With siblings like 'retrieve_single_datasource_entry' and 'retrieve_multiple_datasources', the description lacks any indication of context, prerequisites, or exclusions, leaving the agent to infer usage based on tool names alone.

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