GetDefaultMountServer
Retrieve the default mount server configuration for Veeam Backup & Replication v13 to manage backup mount operations.
Instructions
Get the default mount server.
Input Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Retrieve the default mount server configuration for Veeam Backup & Replication v13 to manage backup mount operations.
Get the default mount server.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
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 'Get' implying a read operation, but doesn't disclose behavioral traits like whether this requires specific permissions, returns a single server or a list, or has any side effects. For a tool with zero annotation coverage, this is insufficient.
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'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 the tool's simplicity (0 parameters, no annotations, no output schema), the description is minimally adequate. However, it lacks context about what a 'default mount server' means in this system and how it differs from other mount server tools, leaving gaps for the agent to infer.
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 tool has 0 parameters with 100% schema description coverage, so the schema fully documents the lack of inputs. The description doesn't need to add parameter semantics, and it correctly doesn't mention any. A baseline of 4 is appropriate for zero-parameter tools.
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 'Get the default mount server' clearly states the verb ('Get') and resource ('default mount server'), making the purpose understandable. However, it doesn't differentiate from sibling tools like 'GetMountServer' or 'GetAllMountServers', leaving ambiguity about what makes this 'default' version distinct.
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. With sibling tools like 'GetMountServer' and 'GetAllMountServers' present, there's no indication of whether this retrieves a pre-configured default, a system-wide setting, or serves a different use case, leaving the agent to guess.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.
curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/juhyungrok4237-boop/veeam-mcp-13'
If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server