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. It mentions downloading a file, implying a read operation, but does not specify if this requires special permissions, affects system state, involves rate limits, or what the output format is (e.g., file content or metadata). This leaves significant gaps in understanding the tool's behavior beyond basic purpose.

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, clear sentence that efficiently conveys the core action without unnecessary words. It is front-loaded with the main purpose, making it easy to parse and understand 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 a download operation with 2 parameters (one required, one nested object), no annotations, no output schema, and 0% schema coverage, the description is insufficient. It lacks details on parameter usage, behavioral traits, and output expectations, making it incomplete for effective tool invocation.

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, with two parameters ('id' and 'body') undocumented. The description adds no meaning beyond the schema—it does not explain what 'id' refers to (e.g., backup ID) or what 'body' is used for (e.g., optional metadata). This fails to compensate for the low schema coverage, leaving parameters largely ambiguous.

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 ('Download') and resource ('backup metadata file for a backup'), making the purpose specific and understandable. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'GetBackup' or 'GetBackupFile', which might retrieve similar data but not necessarily as a downloadable file, leaving some ambiguity in sibling context.

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 other 'Get' or 'Download' tools in the sibling list. It lacks context about prerequisites, timing, or exclusions, leaving the agent to infer usage based on the name alone.

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