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 only states the action ('Get') without mentioning whether this is a read-only operation, if it requires specific permissions, how logs are formatted, if there are rate limits, or what happens on errors. This is inadequate for a tool with potential security or performance implications.

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 with no wasted words, making it highly concise and front-loaded. It efficiently communicates the core purpose without unnecessary elaboration, though this brevity contributes to gaps in other dimensions.

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 (3 parameters with 0% schema coverage, no annotations, no output schema), the description is insufficient. It doesn't explain parameter meanings, return values, error conditions, or behavioral traits, leaving the agent with minimal actionable information beyond the basic purpose.

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, leaving all parameters undocumented. The description mentions 'a specific session' which hints at the 'id' parameter but doesn't explain its format or source. It ignores 'skip' and 'limit' entirely, failing to compensate for the schema gap, which is critical for pagination or filtering behavior.

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 log entries for a specific session' clearly states the verb ('Get') and resource ('log entries for a specific session'), making the purpose understandable. However, it doesn't differentiate from sibling tools like 'GetSession' (which likely retrieves session metadata) or 'GetAutomationSessionLogs' (which appears to target automation sessions), leaving the scope vague regarding what type of session it applies to.

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., 'GetSession', 'GetAutomationSessionLogs', 'GetTaskSessionLogs'), there's no indication of which sessions are eligible, prerequisites, or distinctions between similar logging tools, leaving usage unclear.

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