Veeam VBR v13 MCP Server

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the tool retrieves a password but doesn't mention whether this is a read-only operation, if it requires specific permissions, what the output format is, or any rate limits. For a tool accessing sensitive data like encryption passwords, this lack of detail 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, direct sentence that efficiently conveys the core purpose without unnecessary words. It is front-loaded and wastes no space, making it easy for an agent 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 purpose (retrieving sensitive encryption passwords), the lack of annotations, no output schema, and minimal parameter details make the description insufficient. It doesn't address security implications, output structure, or error conditions, which are critical for an agent to use this tool effectively in 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?

The schema description coverage is 0%, but the description adds value by specifying that the 'id' parameter is used to identify a specific encryption password. However, it doesn't explain the format or source of the ID (e.g., whether it's a UUID, name, or other identifier), leaving ambiguity. With one parameter, the baseline is 4, but the incomplete semantic detail reduces it to 3.

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 encryption password by ID'), making the purpose immediately understandable. It doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'GetAllEncryptionPasswords' or 'VerifyEncryptionPassword', but the specificity of 'by ID' provides some implicit distinction.

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 like 'GetAllEncryptionPasswords' (for listing all passwords) or 'VerifyEncryptionPassword' (for validation). There's no mention of prerequisites, such as needing the password ID, or context about when this retrieval is appropriate.

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