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 'Get volumes' but doesn't disclose behavioral traits such as whether this is a read-only operation, what permissions are required, how results are formatted, or if there are rate limits. 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 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 complexity (a tool interacting with Hyper-V servers), lack of annotations, no output schema, and 0% schema description coverage, the description is insufficient. It doesn't explain what 'volumes' entail, the return format, or any operational context, leaving critical gaps for the agent.

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 description doesn't mention the 'id' parameter at all. With 0% schema description coverage and 1 parameter, the schema alone defines the input. The baseline is 3 because the schema provides the necessary structure, but the description adds no semantic value beyond what's in the schema.

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 ('volumes for a Microsoft Hyper-V standalone server'), making the purpose specific and understandable. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'GetManagedServer' or 'GetAllManagedServers', which reduces the score from a perfect 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. With many sibling tools (e.g., 'GetManagedServer', 'GetAllManagedServers'), there's no indication of context, prerequisites, or exclusions, leaving the agent to infer usage.

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