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 mentions 'Rescan', which implies a read or update operation, but fails to describe critical traits like whether it's idempotent, requires specific permissions, triggers background tasks, has side effects (e.g., disrupting services), or provides progress feedback. This leaves significant gaps in understanding the tool's behavior.

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, making it easy to parse. It front-loads the core action and target efficiently, though this brevity contributes to gaps in other dimensions.

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, and no annotations), the description is inadequate. It lacks details on parameters, behavioral traits, return values, and sibling differentiation, leaving the agent with insufficient information to use the tool effectively in context.

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 only hints at 'hostname' as a parameter ('on a specific host') but doesn't explain the 'body' parameter or its purpose (e.g., optional filters or settings). It adds minimal meaning beyond the schema, failing to compensate for the coverage gap.

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 ('Rescan') and target ('inventory objects on a specific host'), which clarifies the tool's purpose. However, it's vague about what 'inventory objects' entail (e.g., VMs, files, configurations) and doesn't differentiate from sibling tools like 'RescanAllManagedServers' or 'RescanManagedServer', leaving ambiguity about scope and alternatives.

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?

The description provides minimal context by specifying 'on a specific host', implying usage when targeting a single host. However, it lacks explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., 'RescanAllManagedServers' for broader scans), prerequisites, or exclusions, offering no clear decision-making criteria.

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