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 of behavioral disclosure. It states the tool retrieves data, implying a read-only operation, but doesn't specify if it requires authentication, has rate limits, returns structured data, or handles errors. For a tool with zero annotation coverage, this lack of behavioral details 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 a single, efficient sentence with no wasted words, clearly front-loading the core action. It's appropriately sized for a simple retrieval tool, making it easy to parse quickly.

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 tool's simplicity (1 parameter) but lack of annotations and output schema, the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain the return format (e.g., JSON object with release details), error handling, or authentication needs, which are crucial for an agent to use it effectively in a no-annotation environment.

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 mentions retrieving from 'a specified Storyblok space,' which hints at a context parameter, but the input schema only includes 'release_id' with 0% coverage. Since schema description coverage is low (0%), the description doesn't compensate by explaining what 'release_id' represents (e.g., numeric ID, format, or source), leaving parameters partially undocumented.

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 ('a single release from a specified Storyblok space'), providing a specific verb+resource combination. However, it doesn't differentiate from sibling tools like 'retrieve_multiple_releases' or 'get_story', which might retrieve similar content, leaving room for ambiguity about when to choose this specific retrieval tool.

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 a specific space), exclusions, or comparisons to sibling tools like 'retrieve_multiple_releases' for batch operations or 'get_story' for different content types, leaving the agent without usage context.

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