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 indicates a read operation ('Get all') but does not specify whether it requires authentication, has rate limits, returns paginated results, or details error conditions. For a tool with zero annotation coverage, this leaves significant behavioral gaps.

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 appropriately sized and front-loaded, 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 tool's complexity (list operation with parameters), lack of annotations, no output schema, and low schema description coverage, the description is insufficient. It does not address parameter usage, return format, or behavioral aspects, 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?

The input schema has two parameters (skip, limit) with 0% description coverage, and the tool description does not mention or explain these parameters at all. Since the schema lacks descriptions, the description fails to compensate, leaving parameters undocumented and their semantics unclear.

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 verb ('Get all') and resource ('active instant recovery mount points for Microsoft Hyper-V VMs'), making the purpose specific and understandable. However, it does not explicitly distinguish this tool from its sibling 'GetAllAzureInstantVMRecoveryMounts' or 'GetAllInstantViVMRecoveryMounts', which target different platforms, so it misses full sibling differentiation.

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 'GetAllInstant...Mounts' tools for different platforms or more specific mount-related tools. It lacks context on prerequisites, exclusions, or typical scenarios, offering minimal usage direction.

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