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 mentions 'Start' implying an asynchronous or initiating action, but doesn't disclose behavioral traits like whether it's destructive, requires specific permissions, has side effects, or involves rate limits. This leaves critical operational context missing for a migration tool.

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 that efficiently states the core action. It's front-loaded with the verb 'Start' and avoids unnecessary words, making it appropriately concise for a tool name that already hints at the domain.

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 (migration operation), lack of annotations, 0% schema coverage, no output schema, and presence of nested objects, the description is incomplete. It doesn't address what the tool returns, error conditions, or detailed behavior, leaving too many gaps for 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%, and the description provides no information about parameters. It doesn't explain what 'mountId' refers to or what the 'body' object should contain, failing to compensate for the lack of schema documentation. This leaves both 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 ('Start file share migration') and resource ('to the original or another location'), which provides a basic purpose. However, it's vague about what exactly is being migrated (unstructured data recovery mounts) and doesn't distinguish from sibling tools like 'InstantUnstructuredDataRecoveryMount' or 'InstantUnstructuredDataShareSwitchover', 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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives is provided. The description implies it's for migration after a recovery mount, but doesn't specify prerequisites, timing, or exclusions. Sibling tools suggest related operations (mount, unmount, switchover), but no comparison or context is given.

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