Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
backrest-mcp

backrest-mcp

by TadMSTR
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Remote

get_config

Read a secret-free, allowlisted view of Backrest configuration—including repos, plans, and auth—so you can inspect settings without exposing passwords, env values, flags, or hook commands.

Instructions

Read a secret-free view of the Backrest configuration (repos, plans, auth).

Returns an allowlist projection, not the raw config:

  • top level: modno, version, instance

  • repos: id, guid, uri (user:password@ and query removed; fully redacted if ambiguous), autoUnlock, autoInitialize, shared, originInstanceId, prune/check/forget policies, commandPrefix, envKeys (variable names only), hasPassword (bool), flagCount (int), hooks

  • plans: id, repo, paths, excludes, iexcludes, schedule, retention, skipIfUnchanged, backupFlagCount (int), hooks

  • hooks: conditions, onError, and action (the action type name only)

  • auth: disabled, and user names

Never included: repo passwords, env values, restic flags, hook commands and targets (webhook URLs, tokens), user password hashes, the multihost sync block (identity, pairing secrets), or any field not listed above.

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": "get_config"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.3.0

TDQS

A4.1/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

With zero annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden and does so unusually well: it explains the allowlist projection model, the redaction rule for repo URIs ('user:password@ and query removed; fully redacted if ambiguous'), and enumerates exactly what is never returned (passwords, env values, restic flags, hook commands/targets, password hashes, multihost sync block). That is precisely the kind of negative-space disclosure an agent needs to reason about data safety.

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 purpose and the projection caveat, then structured as scannable per-section bullets, so the length is mostly justified. The exhaustive per-field enumeration is partly redundant with the existing output schema, which costs it the top score.

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?

Given a zero-parameter read tool with an output schema, the description is more than sufficient: it explains the shape of the response at a semantic level (redaction, field allowlisting) that the schema alone cannot convey, and leaves no question about what an agent will and will not receive.

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?

The tool takes no parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description correctly adds nothing about inputs and there is no ambiguity about how to call it.

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 ('Read a secret-free view of the Backrest configuration') and immediately scopes it ('repos, plans, auth'), which is far more informative than the bare name. It never names a sibling, though, so an agent must still infer how this differs from list_plans or get_summary when it only wants plan data.

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?

Usage is only implied: an agent can infer this is the tool for inspecting configuration without secrets. There is no explicit when-to-use statement, no exclusion, and no pointer to alternatives such as list_plans for a plan-only listing or get_summary for aggregates.

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