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 for behavioral disclosure. It states the tool retrieves data, implying a read-only operation, but doesn't specify permissions needed, rate limits, pagination behavior, or what constitutes a 'release' in Storyblok. This leaves significant gaps for a tool with potential complexity.

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 directly states the tool's function without unnecessary words. It's appropriately sized for a straightforward retrieval operation and front-loads the core purpose effectively.

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 retrieval tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description provides basic purpose but lacks critical context about behavior, return format, and usage guidelines. The 100% schema coverage helps with parameters, but overall completeness is minimal given the tool's potential complexity in a content management system.

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%, so the schema already documents both parameters (space_id and branch_id). The description mentions 'specified Storyblok space' which aligns with space_id but adds no additional semantic context about parameter usage, format expectations, or how branch_id affects the retrieval.

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 ('multiple releases from a specified Storyblok space'), making the purpose understandable. However, it doesn't differentiate from sibling tools like 'retrieve_single_release' or explain what 'releases' are in this context, preventing a perfect score.

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. With sibling tools like 'retrieve_single_release' and 'retrieve_multiple_activities' available, the description lacks any context about appropriate use cases, prerequisites, or comparisons to other retrieval tools.

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