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 performs an installation, implying a write/mutation operation, but doesn't describe side effects (e.g., requires admin rights, may restart services, is irreversible), error handling, or performance implications. This leaves critical behavioral traits unspecified 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 a single, clear sentence with no wasted words. It is front-loaded with the core action and target, making it easy to parse quickly. This is appropriately concise for the basic information it conveys.

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 mutation tool with 2 parameters, nested objects, no annotations, and no output schema), the description is inadequate. It lacks details on parameters, behavioral effects, prerequisites, and expected outcomes. For a tool that installs software on entities, this leaves too many gaps for safe and effective use by an AI 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 input schema has 2 parameters (id and body) with 0% description coverage, and the tool description provides no information about them. It doesn't explain what 'id' refers to (e.g., entity ID) or what 'body' should contain (e.g., installation settings). This fails to compensate for the lack of schema documentation, leaving parameters entirely undocumented.

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 action ('Install Veeam Agent') and target ('on discovered entities'), which provides a basic purpose. However, it lacks specificity about what 'discovered entities' are (e.g., servers, VMs) and doesn't differentiate from sibling tools like 'UninstallAgentFromDiscoveredEntities' or 'UpgradeAgentOnDiscoveredEntities' beyond the verb. This makes it vague in distinguishing exact use cases.

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. It doesn't mention prerequisites (e.g., entities must be discovered first), conditions for use, or comparisons to related tools like 'applyAgentPolicyConfiguration' or 'CreateManagedServer'. The agent is left to infer usage from the name alone, which is insufficient.

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