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 full burden for behavioral disclosure. While 'Rescan' implies a read/scan operation rather than mutation, it doesn't specify whether this triggers background processes, requires specific permissions, has side effects on existing protection settings, or provides progress feedback. For a tool with zero annotation coverage, this leaves significant behavioral gaps.

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 that states the tool's purpose without unnecessary words. It's appropriately sized for a simple scanning operation and front-loads the essential information.

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?

For a tool with no annotations, 0% schema description coverage, and no output schema, the description is insufficient. It doesn't explain what happens after the rescan, what 'discover new machines' means operationally, whether there are limitations or prerequisites, or what the agent should expect as a result. The context demands more comprehensive guidance.

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?

The schema has 0% description coverage for its single 'id' parameter, and the tool description provides no information about what this ID represents, where to find it, or its format. The description mentions 'protection group' which hints at the parameter's purpose, but doesn't explicitly connect it to the 'id' parameter or provide any semantic details beyond what's implied.

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 ('Rescan') and target ('protection group') with the specific outcome ('to discover new machines'). It distinguishes from siblings like 'RescanAllManagedServers' or 'RescanInventoryObjects' by focusing on protection groups specifically. However, it doesn't explicitly contrast with these similar tools.

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 about when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'RescanAllManagedServers' or 'RescanInventoryObjects'. The description implies usage after new machines are added to a protection group, but doesn't state prerequisites, timing considerations, or when other rescan tools might be more appropriate.

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