Veeam VBR v13 MCP Server

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. While 'Remove' implies a destructive mutation, the description doesn't disclose critical behavioral traits: whether this operation is reversible, what permissions are required, whether it affects associated backups or configurations, or what happens to the server's data. For a destructive operation with zero annotation coverage, this is a significant gap.

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 front-loaded with the core action and target, making it immediately understandable 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 destructive mutation tool with no annotations, no output schema, and 0% parameter documentation, the description is incomplete. It doesn't address behavioral implications, success/failure responses, or parameter meaning. Given the complexity of server removal in backup infrastructure, more context about consequences and requirements would be necessary.

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 1 parameter with 0% description coverage. The description doesn't mention the 'id' parameter at all, providing no additional semantic context beyond what the bare schema indicates. Since schema coverage is 0%, the description fails to compensate, but with only one parameter, the baseline remains at 3 as the agent can infer it's an identifier.

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 ('Remove') and target resource ('a server from the backup infrastructure'), providing a specific verb+resource combination. However, it does not distinguish this tool from other deletion tools in the sibling list (e.g., DeleteBackup, DeleteCreds, DeleteUser), which all perform similar removal operations on different resource types.

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 exclusions. With many sibling tools performing deletions on various resources (e.g., DeleteBackup, DeleteCreds), there is no indication of when this specific server removal is appropriate versus other deletion operations.

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