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. While 'Deletes' implies a destructive mutation, the description doesn't disclose critical behavioral traits: whether deletion is permanent, what permissions are required, if there are confirmation steps, rate limits, or what the response looks like. It's minimal for a destructive operation.

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 that states the core purpose without unnecessary words. It's appropriately sized and front-loaded, with every word earning its place.

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?

For a destructive mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It lacks behavioral context (permanence, permissions, response), usage guidance, and doesn't compensate for the absence of structured safety or output information. The 100% schema coverage helps only with parameters.

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 100%, with the single parameter 'webhook_endpoint_id' fully documented in the schema. The description doesn't add any parameter details beyond what the schema provides (e.g., where to find the ID, format examples). Baseline 3 is appropriate when schema does the heavy lifting.

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 ('Deletes') and target resource ('an existing webhook endpoint in a specified Storyblok space'), providing a specific verb+resource combination. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'delete_webhook' vs 'delete_access_token' or 'delete_asset', though the resource specificity helps somewhat.

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. It doesn't mention prerequisites (e.g., needing the webhook endpoint ID), when deletion is appropriate, or what happens after deletion. No explicit alternatives or exclusions are provided.

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