Storyblok MCP Server

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden but offers minimal behavioral insight. It states it's an update operation via a specific API, implying mutation, but doesn't disclose permission requirements, side effects (e.g., whether changes affect existing users), rate limits, or error handling. This is inadequate for a mutation tool with 12 parameters.

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 front-loads the core purpose ('Updates a space role's configuration') and specifies the API context. There is no wasted verbiage or redundancy, making it highly concise and well-structured for quick understanding.

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 (12 parameters, mutation operation) and lack of annotations or output schema, the description is insufficient. It doesn't explain what a successful update returns, error conditions, or behavioral nuances like partial updates versus full replacements. For a tool with this many configurable fields, more context is needed to guide 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?

The description adds no parameter-specific information beyond what's in the schema, which has 100% coverage with detailed descriptions for all 12 parameters. This meets the baseline of 3, as the schema adequately documents each parameter's purpose and type without needing additional explanation in the description.

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 ('Updates') and resource ('a space role's configuration'), specifying it operates via the Storyblok Management API. It distinguishes from siblings like 'create_space_role' by focusing on updates rather than creation, but doesn't explicitly differentiate from other update tools like 'update_collaborator' or 'update_space'.

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 an existing space role ID), exclusions, or compare it to similar tools like 'update_collaborator' or 'fetch_space_roles' for read operations. Usage is implied only by the verb 'Updates'.

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