Skip to main content
Glama
AIops-tools

Veeam AIops

by AIops-tools
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

start_vm_restore

Initiate a VM restore from a restore point, overwriting or creating the VM. Use dry_run to preview the target and confirm before calling because it is irreversible.

Instructions

[WRITE] Start a VM restore from a restore point. IRREVERSIBLE — no undo token.

Overwrites or creates a VM; confirm with the user before calling. Runs as an async session — poll with session_list / session_get. Pass dry_run=True to preview: the preview resolves the opaque restore-point id to the VM name and creation time it would restore, so there is something real to confirm.

Refuses when that VM name matches the configured VBR host — with no target mapping this is a restore-to-original, so it would overwrite the Veeam server serving this API. The name check is a safety net, not a proof (a VM display name is not a hostname); read the preview before approving.

Refuses separately when the restore point cannot be READ at all, because then it cannot name the machine it would overwrite — a preview reporting vmName: null is not something to approve. Set acknowledge_unresolved=True only when the user has confirmed the target in the Veeam console.

Args: restore_point_id: Restore point id (see restore_list_points). dry_run: If True, preview without restoring. acknowledge_unresolved: Proceed even though the restore point could not be read and the target machine is therefore unknown. target: Veeam target name from config.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
targetNo
dry_runNo
restore_point_idYes
acknowledge_unresolvedNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv0.15.2
    • addedInput schema / properties / acknowledge_unresolved
      Added value: +{
+  "default": false,
+  "title": "Acknowledge Unresolved",
+  "type": "boolean"
+}
  2. Changed1 schema field changedv0.8.0
    • addedInput schema / properties / dry_run
      Added value: +{
+  "default": false,
+  "title": "Dry Run",
+  "type": "boolean"
+}
  3. First observedv0.2.0

TDQS

A4.9/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full safety burden and does so thoroughly: it labels the operation IRREVERSIBLE with no undo token, notes that it overwrites or creates a VM, explains the async session model, and spells out both refusal conditions. It even clarifies that the VBR host name check is a safety net rather than proof.

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

Conciseness5/5

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

The description is front-loaded with the critical WRITE / IRREVERSIBLE warning, then follows with operational context, refusal behavior, and a structured Args section. Despite its length, every sentence adds safety or usage value for a destructive operation.

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?

With no annotations, no output schema, and 0% schema description coverage, the description must be self-sufficient, and it is: it covers purpose, reversibility, async polling, preview behavior, refusal cases, and all four parameters. An agent has everything needed to call it correctly or avoid calling it in unsafe situations.

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

Parameters4/5

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 it very nearly does: it explains restore_point_id (referencing restore_list_points), dry_run's preview behavior and resolved fields, acknowledge_unresolved's high-risk semantics, and target as a Veeam target name from config. The only weak point is that 'target' remains somewhat vague about how it maps to restore behavior.

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

Purpose5/5

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

The description opens with a specific verb and resource: starting a VM restore from a restore point. It distinguishes this tool from siblings like restore_list_points by naming the required argument and routing the agent there, while also clearly marking it as a WRITE operation.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

It explicitly states when to use it (start a VM restore), what to do first (confirm with the user), how to preview safely (dry_run=True), and how to monitor it (poll with session_list / session_get). It also describes two distinct refusal conditions, so the agent knows exactly when the call will fail.

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