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 mentions the 'Management API' but doesn't disclose behavioral traits like pagination (implied by 'page' and 'per_page' parameters), authentication needs, rate limits, error handling, or what 'tasks' represent in Storyblok. The description is minimal and lacks operational context.

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 no wasted words. It's front-loaded with the core action and resource, making it easy to scan. Every part earns its place by specifying the API context.

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 annotations, no output schema), the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain parameter usage, return values, or behavioral aspects like pagination or errors. For a retrieval tool with multiple parameters, this leaves significant gaps for an agent.

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%, so parameters are undocumented in the schema. The description adds no meaning beyond the tool name—it doesn't explain what 'space_id', 'page', or 'per_page' are, their formats, or how they affect retrieval. This fails to compensate for the schema 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 ('retrieves') and resource ('multiple tasks from a specified Storyblok space'), and mentions the API ('Management API'). It distinguishes from siblings like 'retrieve_single_task' by specifying 'multiple', but doesn't explicitly differentiate from other list/retrieval tools like 'retrieve_multiple_stories' or 'fetch_stories'.

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 many sibling tools for retrieving various resources (e.g., 'retrieve_multiple_stories', 'fetch_stories', 'retrieve_single_task'), the description lacks context on use cases, prerequisites, or comparisons.

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