Skip to main content
Glama

server_restore_backup

Restore Minecraft server backups using specific backup files to recover server data from previous states.

Instructions

Restore a specific backup for a Minecraft server

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
server_idYesServer ID or UUID
backup_idYesBackup ID
filenameYesBackup filename to restore
in_placeNoRestore in place (true) or to a new location

Implementation Reference

  • Registration and handler implementation for the server_restore_backup tool.
    server.tool(
      "server_restore_backup",
      "Restore a specific backup for a Minecraft server",
      {
        server_id: z.string().describe("Server ID or UUID"),
        backup_id: z.string().describe("Backup ID"),
        filename: z.string().min(5).describe("Backup filename to restore"),
        in_place: z.boolean().default(true).describe("Restore in place (true) or to a new location"),
      },
      async ({ server_id, backup_id, filename, in_place }) => {
        try {
          const data = await client.post(
            `/servers/${server_id}/backups/backup/${backup_id}/restore`,
            { filename, inPlace: in_place }
          );
          return { content: [{ type: "text", text: JSON.stringify(data, null, 2) }] };
        } catch (error) {
          const msg = error instanceof Error ? error.message : String(error);
          return { content: [{ type: "text", text: `Error: ${msg}` }], isError: true };
        }
      }
    );
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It states the action ('Restore') which implies a mutation, but doesn't disclose critical behavioral traits: whether this is destructive (overwrites current server state), requires specific permissions, has side effects (e.g., server downtime), or rate limits. The description is minimal and lacks necessary operational context.

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 a single, efficient sentence with zero wasted words. It's appropriately sized for the tool's complexity and front-loads the core action, making it easy to parse quickly.

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

Completeness2/5

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

Given this is a mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain what happens during restoration (e.g., server stops, data replaces current state), success/failure indicators, or return values. For a potentially destructive operation, more context is needed.

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

Parameters3/5

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 all parameters thoroughly. The description adds no additional meaning about parameters beyond what the schema provides (e.g., explaining relationships between server_id, backup_id, and filename). Baseline score of 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.

Purpose4/5

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

The description clearly states the action ('Restore') and target ('a specific backup for a Minecraft server'), providing a specific verb+resource combination. However, it doesn't distinguish this tool from sibling tools like 'server_clone' or 'server_update' which might also involve server state changes, missing explicit differentiation.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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 existing backups), when-not-to-use scenarios (e.g., during server runtime), or compare to siblings like 'server_clone' or 'server_update' for similar operations.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/HadiCherkaoui/crafty-mcp'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server