Veeam VBR v13 MCP Server

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the tool creates jobs, implying a write operation, but fails to mention critical details like required permissions, whether the job starts automatically, potential side effects, or error handling. This leaves significant gaps in understanding the tool's behavior.

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

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

The description is a single, efficient sentence that directly states the tool's purpose without unnecessary words. It is front-loaded and appropriately sized, making it easy to parse quickly.

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

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

Given the complexity of creating a job (likely involving multiple configuration options), the absence of annotations, 0% schema coverage, no output schema, and a nested parameter structure, the description is insufficient. It does not compensate for the lack of structured data, leaving the tool poorly documented for effective use.

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

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

The input schema has 0% description coverage and includes a nested 'body' object with unspecified properties. The description does not add any parameter semantics—it does not explain what the 'body' should contain, such as job type, schedule, or target details. This lack of information makes parameter usage unclear and unhelpful.

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

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

The description clearly states the action ('Create a new') and the resource ('backup, replication, or copy job on the Veeam Backup server'), making the purpose specific and understandable. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'CloneJob' or 'StartJob', which might involve similar job-related operations, leaving room for ambiguity in sibling distinction.

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

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, such as 'CloneJob' or 'UpdateJob', nor does it mention any prerequisites, context, or exclusions. This lack of usage instructions could lead to confusion in tool selection among the many job-related siblings.

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