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 states 'Get' which implies a read-only operation, but doesn't disclose behavioral traits like whether it requires specific permissions, returns paginated results, has rate limits, or what happens on errors. The description is minimal and lacks crucial context for safe invocation.

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 directly states the tool's purpose without unnecessary words. It's appropriately sized and front-loaded with the core functionality.

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 (1 parameter with nested structure, 0% schema coverage, no annotations, no output schema), the description is inadequate. It doesn't explain parameter usage, return format, error conditions, or behavioral constraints. For a tool that likely interacts with infrastructure management systems, this leaves too many gaps for reliable 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% with 1 parameter ('body') that's a nested object with no documented properties. The description doesn't explain what 'body' should contain (e.g., cluster name, SCVMM server details, filtering criteria). It fails to compensate for the complete lack of schema documentation, leaving parameters effectively 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 clearly states the action ('Get') and resource ('Microsoft Hyper-V servers'), specifying they are managed by either a Hyper-V cluster or SCVMM server. It distinguishes from generic inventory tools by focusing on Hyper-V hosts, though it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'GetAllInventoryHosts' or 'ResolveCloudDirectorHosts'.

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. The description implies it's for retrieving Hyper-V hosts from specific management sources, but it doesn't mention prerequisites, exclusions, or when to choose other inventory tools like 'GetAllInventoryHosts' or 'GetInventoryObjects'.

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