Veeam VBR v13 MCP Server

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the tool stops publishing/unmounts a VM, implying a destructive or state-changing operation, but lacks details on permissions required, whether the action is reversible, effects on the VM (e.g., data loss), or any rate limits. This is insufficient for a mutation tool with zero annotation coverage.

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 front-loads the core action ('Stop publishing') and resource ('a VMware vSphere VM'), and the parenthetical 'unmount' adds clarity without redundancy. Every word earns its place.

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 (mutation operation with 2 parameters, nested objects, no output schema, and no annotations), the description is incomplete. It lacks parameter explanations, behavioral details (e.g., side effects), and output information, making it insufficient 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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate for undocumented parameters. It mentions no parameters at all, failing to explain 'mountId' (required) or 'body' (nested object), leaving their purposes and formats unclear. This adds no value beyond the schema, which is inadequate given the low coverage.

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 clearly states the action ('Stop publishing') and target resource ('a VMware vSphere VM'), with 'unmount' in parentheses reinforcing the operation. It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'InstantViVMRecoveryMount' by indicating an opposite operation, though it doesn't explicitly contrast with other unmount tools for different platforms (e.g., AzureInstantVMRecoveryUnmount).

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description implies it's for stopping a published VM, but it doesn't mention prerequisites (e.g., an existing mount), when not to use it, or how it relates to sibling tools like 'InstantViVMRecoveryMigrate' or other unmount tools. This leaves usage context unclear.

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