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 disables maintenance mode, implying a mutation operation, but lacks details on permissions required, whether changes are reversible, side effects, rate limits, or response format. This is inadequate for a mutation tool with zero annotation coverage.

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 waste. It is appropriately sized and front-loaded, directly stating the tool's purpose 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?

Given the tool's complexity (mutation operation with 2 parameters, nested objects, no output schema, and 0% schema coverage), the description is insufficient. It lacks parameter details, behavioral context, usage guidelines, and output information, making it incomplete for effective agent 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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, and the description provides no information about parameters. It doesn't explain what 'id' refers to (e.g., extent identifier) or what 'body' might contain (e.g., additional settings). The description fails to compensate for the lack of schema documentation, leaving both parameters undocumented.

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 ('Disable maintenance mode') and the target resource ('on a SOBR extent'), providing a specific verb+resource combination. It distinguishes from its sibling 'EnableScaleOutExtentMaintenanceMode' by indicating the opposite action, though it doesn't explicitly differentiate from other maintenance or scale-out extent tools.

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 context. It doesn't mention if the SOBR extent must already be in maintenance mode, what happens after disabling, or any related tools like 'DisableScaleOutExtentSealedMode' or 'EnableScaleOutExtentMaintenanceMode' for comparison.

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