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 full burden for behavioral disclosure but fails completely. It doesn't indicate whether this is a read-only or destructive operation, what permissions are required, whether it's asynchronous, what happens to existing recovery media, or any rate limits. The single sentence provides no behavioral context beyond the basic action.

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 with zero wasted words. It's appropriately sized for the tool's apparent complexity and gets straight to the point without unnecessary elaboration.

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?

For a tool that appears to create recovery media (potentially a significant operation), the description is severely inadequate. With no annotations, no output schema, and minimal parameter guidance, it leaves critical questions unanswered about the operation's nature, requirements, and outcomes. The conciseness comes at the expense of necessary context.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage for the single 'id' parameter, the description provides no additional semantic information about what the 'id' represents, its format, or how to obtain it. The description mentions 'specific backup object' which hints at the parameter's purpose but doesn't add meaningful details beyond what's minimally implied.

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 recovery media') and the target resource ('for a specific backup object'), providing a specific verb+resource combination. However, it doesn't differentiate this tool from potential siblings like 'CreateDeploymentKit' or 'CreateComputerRecoveryToken' that also create recovery-related artifacts.

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, prerequisites, or contextual constraints. It doesn't mention what 'recovery media' entails or when this operation is appropriate compared to other recovery tools in the sibling list.

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