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 of behavioral disclosure. It states the tool 'Get a specific restore point,' implying a read-only operation, but does not address critical aspects like permissions required, whether it returns metadata or full data, error conditions, or rate limits. This is inadequate for a tool with no annotation support.

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: 'Get a specific restore point within a replica.' It is front-loaded with the core action and resource, with no unnecessary words or structural fluff, making it highly concise and efficient.

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 of a restore point retrieval tool with no annotations, 0% schema description coverage, and no output schema, the description is insufficient. It lacks details on behavior, parameter meanings, return values, and usage context, making it incomplete for effective tool invocation in this environment.

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 input schema has 0% description coverage, with parameters 'replicaId' and 'id' undocumented. The description does not add any meaning beyond the schema, failing to explain what these IDs represent (e.g., replica identifier, restore point identifier) or their expected formats. With low schema coverage, the description does not compensate, leaving parameters semantically unclear.

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 states the tool 'Get a specific restore point within a replica,' which clearly indicates a retrieval action on a restore point resource. However, it lacks specificity about what a 'restore point' entails (e.g., backup snapshot, recovery state) and does not differentiate from sibling tools like 'GetObjectReplicaRestorePoint' or 'GetAllObjectReplicaRestorePoints,' making it somewhat vague.

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. The description does not mention prerequisites, such as needing a replica ID and restore point ID, or when to choose this over similar tools like 'GetObjectReplicaRestorePoint' (singular) or 'GetAllObjectReplicaRestorePoints' (plural). This leaves usage context unclear.

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