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 states it retrieves a task, implying a read-only operation, but does not disclose behavioral traits such as authentication needs, error handling, rate limits, or what happens if the task does not exist. The description is minimal and lacks necessary context for safe and effective use.

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 sentence that is front-loaded and efficient, with no wasted words. It directly states the tool's purpose without unnecessary elaboration. However, it could be slightly more informative without losing conciseness.

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 a retrieval tool with no annotations, 0% schema coverage, and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It lacks details on behavior, parameters, return values, and usage context. For a tool interacting with an API, this leaves significant gaps for an AI agent to understand how to invoke it correctly.

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 input schema has one parameter ('task_id') with 0% description coverage, meaning no schema details are provided. The description does not add any meaning about the parameter, such as what a 'task_id' is, its format, or where to find it. However, with only one parameter, the baseline is higher, but the description fails to compensate for the lack of schema details.

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 ('a single task'), which is clear but basic. It mentions 'from a specified Storyblok space using the Management API,' adding some context, but does not distinguish it from sibling tools like 'retrieve_multiple_tasks' or 'get_story,' making it vague in comparison. It avoids tautology by not just restating the name.

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. It does not mention sibling tools like 'retrieve_multiple_tasks' for bulk operations or 'get_story' for other resources, nor does it specify prerequisites or contexts for usage. The description is standalone with no implied or explicit usage instructions.

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