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 the full burden. It states it 'gets' data, implying a read-only operation, but doesn't disclose behavioral traits like pagination handling (via skip/limit parameters), authentication needs, rate limits, or error conditions. For a list tool with parameters, this is insufficient transparency.

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 front-loaded and appropriately sized, 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 has 2 parameters with 0% schema coverage, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It lacks details on parameter usage, return format, pagination behavior, and error handling, which are essential 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%, meaning parameters 'skip' and 'limit' are undocumented in the schema. The description adds no information about these parameters—it doesn't explain they control pagination, their units, or default values. With low schema coverage and no compensation in the description, this is a significant gap.

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 WAN accelerators'), specifying they are 'configured in the backup infrastructure.' This distinguishes it from tools like 'GetWANAccelerator' (singular) by indicating it retrieves multiple items. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from other list tools (e.g., 'GetAllBackupObjects'), making it a 4 rather than a 5.

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. It doesn't mention prerequisites, compare to sibling tools (e.g., 'GetWANAccelerator' for a single item), or specify use cases. This lack of contextual direction leaves the agent without usage instructions.

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