Skip to main content
Glama
AIops-tools

Veeam AIops

by AIops-tools
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

restore_list_points

List Veeam restore points for a backup, newest first, with optional backup_id filtering and a limit to inspect recovery points.

Instructions

[READ] The newest restore points (id, name, creationTime, type), newest first.

Returns {"restorePoints": [...], "returned", "limit", "truncated", "order"}. truncated=true means older points exist beyond this window — raise limit or filter by backup_id; do not read a short list as "that is all there is". With backup_id, a server that ignores the filter is refused, not trusted.

Args: backup_id: Optional Veeam backup id (see backup_list) to filter by. limit: Points to return, 1-1000 (default 100). target: Veeam target name from config; omit to use the default.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNo
targetNo
backup_idNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv0.13.1
    • addedInput schema / properties / limit
      Added value: +{
+  "default": 100,
+  "title": "Limit",
+  "type": "integer"
+}
  2. Addedv0.10.0
  3. Removedv0.8.0
  4. First observedv0.2.0

TDQS

A4.1/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

No annotations exist, so the description carries the full load — and it does disclose real behavior: it is a read ([READ]), it returns a structured payload, truncation means older points exist, and a server that ignores the backup_id filter is refused rather than trusted. That last point is a genuinely useful safety/validation disclosure. Missing only pagination/rate-limit detail.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Front-loaded with the operation type and return shape, then truncation semantics, then an explicit Args block. Every sentence carries information; slightly verbose but no filler.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

There is no output schema, so the description supplies the return envelope keys (restorePoints, returned, limit, truncated, order) and explains how to interpret them. Combined with full parameter documentation, an agent has everything needed to call and interpret the result.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters5/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate and does: it documents backup_id's source (see backup_list), limit's range and default (1-1000, default 100), and target's meaning and default behavior (from config, omit for default). All three parameters gain meaning absent from the bare schema.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb+resource (list restore points), the fields returned (id, name, creationTime, type), and the sort order (newest first). It references backup_list only for id lookup, so sibling differentiation against the other restore/undo tools is not fully established, but the purpose is unmistakable.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Gives conditional guidance (raise limit or filter by backup_id when truncated=true) and points to backup_list for obtaining an id, but never states when this tool should be chosen over alternatives such as undo_list or backup_object_list. Usage is implied rather than explicitly scoped.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools