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 this is a read operation ('Get'), which implies it's non-destructive, but doesn't disclose any behavioral traits like authentication requirements, error handling (e.g., what happens if the ID doesn't exist), rate limits, or the format of the returned credentials record. For a tool with zero annotation coverage, this is a significant gap.

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 front-loads the core purpose without unnecessary words. Every part of the sentence ('Get', 'specific credentials record', 'by ID') contributes directly to understanding the tool's function.

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 lack of annotations and output schema, the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain what a 'credentials record' contains, how the ID is obtained, or what the return value looks like. For a tool that retrieves sensitive data like credentials, more context is needed to ensure safe and correct usage.

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 schema description coverage is 0%, but the description adds meaning by specifying that the 'id' parameter is for retrieving 'a specific credentials record'. This clarifies the parameter's purpose beyond the schema's basic type definition. However, it doesn't provide details like ID format, examples, or constraints, leaving some ambiguity.

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 action ('Get') and resource ('a specific credentials record by ID'), making the purpose immediately understandable. It doesn't differentiate from sibling tools like 'GetAllCreds' or 'GetCloudCreds', but the specificity of 'by ID' provides adequate clarity for a basic retrieval operation.

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 like 'GetAllCreds' or 'GetCloudCreds'. The description implies it's for retrieving a single record when you have its ID, but it doesn't explicitly state this as a usage rule or mention prerequisites (e.g., needing the ID).

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