Veeam VBR v13 MCP Server

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

With no annotations, the description carries full burden but lacks behavioral details. It doesn't disclose whether this is a read-only operation (implied by 'Get'), potential side effects, authentication needs, rate limits, pagination behavior (though parameters suggest it), or return format. The description is minimal and misses key operational context.

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 no wasted words. It front-loads the core purpose ('Get all backup repositories') and adds useful specificity with the parenthetical list of types. Every word earns its place.

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 adequately states the purpose but fails to address parameter usage, behavioral traits, or output expectations, leaving significant gaps for a tool with filtering capabilities.

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 but adds no parameter information. It doesn't explain the purpose of 'skip', 'limit', 'nameFilter', or 'typeFilter', or provide examples of valid 'typeFilter' values (e.g., 'local', 'cloud'). This leaves parameters largely 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 repositories'), specifying the types included (local disk, NAS, object storage, cloud vault). It distinguishes from siblings like 'GetRepository' (singular) and 'GetAllRepositoriesStates' (states only), but doesn't explicitly contrast with other list tools like 'GetAllBackupObjects'.

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. The description doesn't mention prerequisites, filtering capabilities (though parameters exist), or compare with other repository-related tools like 'GetRepository' or 'GetAllScaleOutRepositories'.

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