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 it 'gets' data, implying a read-only operation, but doesn't disclose behavioral traits like pagination (via skip/limit), filtering behavior, rate limits, authentication needs, or return format. For a list tool with 4 parameters, this leaves significant 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 with zero waste. It's front-loaded with the core action and resource, 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 4 parameters with 0% schema coverage, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It lacks details on parameter usage, behavioral constraints, and return values, making it inadequate for effective tool invocation in this context.

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%, so the description must compensate. It mentions no parameters, failing to explain 'skip', 'limit', 'nameFilter', or 'typeFilter'. The reference to proxy types (VMware, etc.) loosely relates to 'typeFilter', but doesn't clarify usage or semantics, leaving 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 verb ('Get') and resource ('all backup proxies'), specifying the types (VMware, Hyper-V, general-purpose). It distinguishes from siblings like 'GetProxy' (singular) and 'GetAllProxiesStates' (states only), but doesn't explicitly contrast them. The purpose is specific and actionable.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'GetProxy' (for a single proxy) or 'GetAllProxiesStates' (for states). The description implies a broad retrieval, but lacks explicit context, prerequisites, or exclusions for usage.

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