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. 'Unpublishes' implies a mutation (likely destructive), but it doesn't disclose whether this requires specific permissions, if it's reversible (e.g., via 'publish_story'), what happens to the story data, or any rate limits. For a mutation tool with zero annotation coverage, this is a significant gap in behavioral 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, clear sentence with zero wasted words. It's appropriately sized and front-loaded, directly stating the tool's purpose without unnecessary elaboration.

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 this is a mutation tool with no annotations, 0% schema description coverage, and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It lacks crucial details like behavioral traits (e.g., reversibility, permissions), parameter meanings (especially for 'lang'), and usage context relative to siblings. The conciseness comes at the cost of necessary information.

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 the schema provides no parameter documentation. The description mentions 'by its ID', which hints at the 'story_id' parameter, but doesn't explain the 'lang' parameter at all. With 2 parameters (1 required) and no schema descriptions, the description adds minimal value beyond what's inferred from the parameter names.

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 ('unpublishes') and resource ('a Storyblok story by its ID'), making the purpose immediately understandable. However, it doesn't differentiate from sibling tools like 'delete_story' or 'bulk_unpublish_stories' (if such existed), which would require more specificity about what 'unpublish' means versus deletion.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. With siblings like 'delete_story', 'publish_story', and 'bulk_publish_stories', it's unclear if unpublishing is reversible, if it affects multiple languages, or what prerequisites exist (e.g., story must be published first).

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