Storyblok MCP Server

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

With no annotations, the description carries full burden but lacks behavioral details. It states it's an update operation, implying mutation, but doesn't disclose permissions needed, rate limits, side effects (e.g., if it overwrites existing data), or response format. This is inadequate for a mutation tool with zero annotation coverage.

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 and front-loaded with the core purpose. It uses bullet points for parameters, which is efficient, though some sentences could be more streamlined (e.g., 'Required:' section is slightly redundant with schema).

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 (mutation tool with 4 parameters, 0% schema coverage, no output schema, and no annotations), the description is incomplete. It covers basic parameters but lacks critical context like behavioral traits, usage scenarios, or output expectations, making it insufficient for safe and effective use.

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%, but the description adds value by explaining parameters: it clarifies 'discussion_id' and 'comment_id' as numeric IDs, and describes 'message_json' and 'message' payload details. However, it doesn't fully compensate for the coverage gap (e.g., missing details on 'message_json' object structure or validation rules).

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 ('Updates') and resource ('a comment in a discussion'), specifying it uses the Storyblok Management API. It distinguishes from siblings like 'create_comment' by focusing on updates, but doesn't explicitly differentiate from other update tools (e.g., 'update_story').

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives is provided. It doesn't mention prerequisites (e.g., authentication), when not to use it, or compare with similar tools like 'update_story' or 'create_comment' from the sibling list.

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