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' but doesn't disclose if this is a destructive operation, requires specific permissions, has side effects, or involves rate limits. For a tool with 'switchover' in its name—implying potential disruption—this is a critical omission.

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, efficient sentence with zero waste. It's appropriately front-loaded, though its brevity contributes to under-specification 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 the tool's complexity (2 parameters, nested object, no output schema, no annotations), the description is completely inadequate. It fails to explain behavior, parameters, or context, leaving the agent unable to use it correctly without guessing.

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 description must compensate. It adds no meaning for the two parameters ('mountId' and 'body'), leaving them completely undocumented. The description doesn't explain what 'mountId' refers to or what the 'body' object should contain.

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 'Start file share switchover' states a verb ('Start') and resource ('file share switchover'), but it's vague about what 'switchover' entails and doesn't distinguish from siblings like 'AzureInstantVMRecoverySwitchover' or 'InstantUnstructuredDataRecoveryMigrate'. It's better than a tautology but lacks specificity.

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. With siblings like 'InstantUnstructuredDataRecoveryMigrate' and 'InstantUnstructuredDataRecoveryUnmount', the description offers no context on prerequisites, timing, or exclusions, making it misleadingly simplistic.

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