Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
mcp-duplicati

mcp-duplicati

by aaronckj
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Hybrid

repair_backup

Repair a backup job's local database by rebuilding its index from the destination. Fixes corruption issues.

Instructions

Repair the local database for a backup job. Rebuilds index from destination.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "backup_id": "<backup_id>"
    },
    "name": "repair_backup"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
backup_idYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

C2.6/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations provided, placing full burden on description. The description mentions 'Rebuilds index from destination' but does not disclose potential side effects, permissions required, or whether the operation is reversible. Minimal behavioral insight.

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?

The description is short (two sentences) with no redundant text. It is easy to parse but could benefit from a bit more detail without sacrificing conciseness.

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?

With no annotations, no output schema, and sparse parameter information, the description lacks completeness. It fails to explain what 'repair' entails, expected outcome, or error conditions for a potentially complex operation.

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

Parameters1/5

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

Schema has 0% description coverage for the only parameter 'backup_id'. The description adds no meaning beyond the parameter name itself.

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 verb 'repair' and the resource 'local database for a backup job'. It distinguishes from common operations like create or delete, though it could be more specific about how it differs from verify_backup or compact_backup.

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 siblings like verify_backup or compact_backup. Missing context for appropriate usage scenarios.

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