Veeam VBR v13 MCP Server

GetUser

Retrieve a specific user or group from Veeam Backup & Replication v13 by providing the unique ID for management and monitoring purposes.

Instructions

Get a specific user or group by ID.

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": {
      "id": "<id>"
    },
    "name": "GetUser"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`id`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.0.0Apr 21, 2026

TDQS

C2.9/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It mentions retrieving by ID but doesn't disclose behavioral traits like required permissions, error handling (e.g., if ID is invalid), rate limits, or response format. For a read operation with zero annotation coverage, this is a significant gap in transparency.

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. It front-loads the key action and resource, making it easy to parse quickly.

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 simplicity (1 parameter, no output schema, no annotations), the description is minimal. It lacks context on prerequisites (e.g., authentication), error cases, or output structure, making it incomplete for reliable agent use despite the low complexity.

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

Parameters3/5

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

Schema description coverage is 0%, but the description adds meaning by specifying that the 'id' parameter is for a user or group. However, it doesn't detail the ID format (e.g., numeric, string pattern) or examples. With one parameter, the baseline is 4, but the lack of format details reduces it to 3.

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 clearly states the action ('Get') and resource ('a specific user or group'), making the purpose evident. It distinguishes between user and group retrieval, which is helpful, but doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'ViewAllUsers' or 'GetAllUsers' (implied by sibling list).

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., 'ViewAllUsers' for listing all users or 'GetAllUsers' from siblings). The description only states what it does, not when it's appropriate, leaving the agent to infer usage context.

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

Deploy Server