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. 'Stop FCD publishing (dismount)' implies a destructive operation that ends a session, but it doesn't disclose critical behaviors: whether this requires specific permissions, if it's reversible, what happens to the mounted resources, or any side effects like data loss. For a tool with no annotations and likely mutation, this is a significant gap in transparency.

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 with a single sentence 'Stop FCD publishing (dismount).' It's front-loaded and wastes no words, making it easy to parse quickly. Every part of the sentence contributes to understanding the tool's purpose.

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 tool's complexity (likely a mutation operation with 2 parameters, nested objects, and no output schema), the description is incomplete. It lacks details on parameters, behavioral traits, prerequisites, and expected outcomes. With no annotations and low schema coverage, the description doesn't provide enough context for safe and effective use.

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%, so the schema provides no parameter details. The description adds no information about the parameters (mountId and body), such as what mountId refers to (e.g., a session ID) or what the body object should contain. With 2 parameters and no schema descriptions, the description fails to compensate, leaving parameters 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 'Stop FCD publishing (dismount)' clearly indicates the action (stop/dismount) and target (FCD publishing), but it's vague about what 'FCD' refers to (likely VMware vSphere Flash Read Cache or similar) and doesn't specify the resource context (e.g., a mounted session). It distinguishes from siblings like 'InstantRecoveryVmwareFcdMountWithSession' by being the opposite operation, but lacks explicit sibling differentiation.

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., needing an active mount session), exclusions, or related tools like 'InstantRecoveryVmwareFcdMigrateWithSession' for migration instead of dismounting. The description implies usage only by stating the action without context.

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