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 mentions retrieval via the Management API and optional filtering, but it doesn't disclose critical behavioral traits such as whether this is a read-only operation, potential rate limits, authentication requirements, pagination behavior, or what the return format looks like. For a retrieval tool with zero annotation coverage, this is a significant gap.

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 appropriately sized with two sentences that are front-loaded and waste-free. The first sentence states the core purpose, and the second adds optional functionality, making it efficient and easy to parse.

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 of retrieving multiple workflows, no annotations, no output schema, and low schema description coverage, the description is incomplete. It lacks details on behavioral aspects (e.g., safety, rate limits), output format, and comprehensive usage guidelines, making it inadequate for informed tool selection and invocation.

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 description adds meaning by explaining that the 'content_type' parameter is used for optional filtering (e.g., 'page', 'article'), which clarifies its purpose beyond the schema's generic title. However, with 0% schema description coverage and only one parameter, the description compensates somewhat but doesn't provide full details like allowed values or examples. The baseline is adjusted since it adds some value.

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 ('Retrieves') and resource ('all workflows in a Storyblok space via the Management API'), making the purpose specific and understandable. However, it doesn't explicitly distinguish itself from sibling tools like 'retrieve_single_workflow' or 'fetch_stories', which could provide similar retrieval functions for different resources.

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 mentions optional filtering by content type, which implies usage when such filtering is needed, but it doesn't provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., 'retrieve_single_workflow' for a specific workflow or 'fetch_stories' for stories). No exclusions or prerequisites are stated.

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