ppdm-mcp-server

list_schedules

Retrieves protection policy schedules from PowerProtect Data Manager, showing frequency, start time, duration, and enabled state so you can verify backup timing and coverage.

Instructions

List all PPDM protection policy schedules — frequency, start time, duration, and enabled state.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "list_schedules"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv4.2.2Nov 11, 2026

TDQS

B3.3/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry behavioral disclosure; it identifies the returned schedule attributes and that all schedules are returned, but omits pagination, permissions, ordering, and whether filtering is possible. For a read-only list the verb implies safety, but the remaining operational details are absent.

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?

It is a single front-loaded sentence that lists the resource and relevant returned fields without filler. Every phrase contributes to identifying the tool's output.

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

Completeness4/5

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

For a zero-parameter read-only list with no output schema and no annotations, the description is mostly sufficient: it says all schedules are returned and names the key fields. It could add ordering/pagination or explicit read-only behavior, but the core call context is present.

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?

There are zero input parameters, so there are no parameter semantics to explain. The description does not need to document inputs and the 100% schema coverage is vacuous; baseline 4 is appropriate.

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 names a specific verb ("List"), a precise resource ("PPDM protection policy schedules"), and the fields included. It distinguishes schedules from policies by resource, though it does not explicitly contrast with sibling listing tools such as list_policies.

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?

No when-to-use guidance, prerequisites, or alternatives are stated. "List all" implies a read-only lookup, but it does not explain when to choose this over list_policies or update_schedule.

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