Veeam VBR v13 MCP Server

CreateRepository

Add a new backup repository to Veeam Backup & Replication v13 infrastructure for storing and managing backup data.

Instructions

Add a new backup repository.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "body": "<body>"
    },
    "name": "CreateRepository"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`body`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.0.0Apr 21, 2026

TDQS

C2.8/5.0

Behavior2/5

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. 'Add a new backup repository' implies a creation/mutation operation but lacks details on permissions, side effects (e.g., if it affects existing backups), response format, or error conditions. This is inadequate 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.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single, efficient sentence with no wasted words, making it easy to parse. It is front-loaded with the core purpose, though it lacks additional context that might be needed for completeness.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness2/5

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 1 nested parameter), lack of annotations, no output schema, and 0% schema description coverage, the description is insufficient. It does not explain what a backup repository entails, required inputs, or expected outcomes, leaving significant gaps for the agent.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters2/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The input schema has 1 parameter ('body') with 0% description coverage and no details in the schema. The description does not mention any parameters, leaving the agent with no guidance on what 'body' should contain (e.g., repository name, storage settings). This fails to compensate for the low schema coverage.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description 'Add a new backup repository' clearly states the action ('Add') and resource ('backup repository'), making the tool's purpose understandable. However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like 'CreateScaleOutRepository' or 'UpdateRepository', which are related but distinct operations, preventing a perfect score.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as 'CreateScaleOutRepository' for scalable storage or 'UpdateRepository' for modifications. There are no prerequisites, exclusions, or context provided, leaving the agent to infer usage from the tool name alone.

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

Deploy Server