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 full burden. It states 'Import' implies a write/mutation operation, but doesn't disclose behavioral traits such as required permissions, whether it overwrites existing passwords, rate limits, error handling, or what happens on success/failure. This is inadequate for a tool that likely modifies system state.

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 extremely concise—a single three-word phrase—with no wasted words. It's front-loaded and to the point, though this brevity contributes to underspecification rather than clarity.

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 no annotations, 0% schema coverage, no output schema, and a likely state-changing operation (import), the description is severely incomplete. It doesn't cover usage, parameters, behavior, or outcomes, leaving the agent with insufficient context to invoke the tool correctly.

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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, with 1 parameter ('body') that is a nested object with no documented properties. The description adds no information about parameter semantics—it doesn't explain what 'body' should contain (e.g., file data, JSON structure, password entries). This fails to compensate for the lack of schema documentation.

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 'Import encryption passwords' restates the tool name with minimal elaboration. It specifies the verb 'Import' and resource 'encryption passwords', but lacks specificity about what import entails (e.g., from where, in what format, to what destination). It doesn't distinguish from siblings like 'ImportCloudCredentials' or 'ImportCredentials', leaving ambiguity about scope.

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 doesn't mention prerequisites, context (e.g., after creating encryption passwords, for backup systems), or exclusions. Siblings include 'CreateEncryptionPassword', 'ChangeEncryptionPassword', and 'ExportEncryptionPasswords', but no differentiation is offered.

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