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. It states this is a read operation ('Get'), but doesn't disclose any behavioral traits like pagination behavior (implied by skip/limit parameters), authentication requirements, rate limits, performance characteristics, or what 'all available' means in practice (e.g., includes deleted/archived points?).

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 with zero wasted words. It's appropriately front-loaded with the core functionality.

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 with 8 parameters, 0% schema coverage, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is inadequate. It doesn't explain what restore points are, what data they contain, how results are structured, or how to use the extensive filtering parameters. The description leaves too many gaps for effective tool 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?

With 8 parameters and 0% schema description coverage, the description provides no information about any parameters. It doesn't mention filtering capabilities, pagination options, or parameter formats/constraints, leaving all parameter semantics 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 verb ('Get') and resource ('all available restore points') with scope ('across the entire Veeam infrastructure'). It distinguishes this as a retrieval operation rather than a mutation, but doesn't explicitly differentiate it from similar sibling tools like 'GetAllObjectReplicaRestorePoints' or 'GetObjectRestorePoint'.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. With many sibling tools that also retrieve restore points (e.g., 'GetAllObjectReplicaRestorePoints', 'GetObjectRestorePoint'), the description offers no context about scope differences, filtering capabilities, or performance considerations.

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