Skip to main content
Glama

YouSpot

by com.youspot

Ask about HubSpot contacts

ask_about_hubspot_contacts
Read-only

Query the user's HubSpot contacts — the people synced from the HubSpot portals they've connected. Use this for any question about their CRM contacts: engagement filters ('show me people with more than 10 page views'), lifecycle and pipeline ('how many customers do I have?', 'leads with an open deal'), firmographics ('contacts at Google', 'people in Boston'), attribution ('which source brought the most contacts?'), email activity, deal amounts, lead scores, or form conversions. Answered by generating a read-only SQL query over the synced contact table, so it returns columns and rows rather than prose — summarize the rows for the user, and say how many there were. If it reports no contacts synced, tell them to import at /hubspot/import. Keep the question under 500 characters.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
questionYesThe question about their HubSpot contacts, in plain English. Pass the user's own phrasing where you can.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4.7/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

The description reveals key behavior beyond the readOnlyHint annotation: it generates a read-only SQL query, returns columns and rows rather than prose, and tells the agent to summarize rows and report the count. It also specifies the fallback behavior when no contacts are synced (direct to /hubspot/import). This is substantial behavioral context that annotations alone do not provide.

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 detailed but every sentence serves a distinct purpose: defining the resource, illustrating use cases, explaining the output behavior, and giving a fallback instruction. The key information is front-loaded, and there is no filler or repetition.

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

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the tool has one parameter, no output schema, and a clear read-only annotation, the description supplies all needed context: what the tool does, what kinds of questions to ask, what the response format looks like, and what to do in the edge case of no synced contacts. Nothing critical is missing.

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

Parameters4/5

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

The input schema already covers the single 'question' parameter well, including 'plain English' and preserving user phrasing. The description adds the 500-character limit and a rich set of example questions, which clarifies what kinds of queries are appropriate. This goes slightly beyond the schema's baseline but does not radically expand it.

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

Purpose5/5

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

The description opens with a specific verb ('Query') and resource ('the user's HubSpot contacts'), and clarifies these are people synced from connected HubSpot portals. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like ask_about_hubspot_companies by focusing on contacts rather than companies. The scope is immediately clear and actionable.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

The description explicitly states 'Use this for any question about their CRM contacts' and provides a broad set of example query categories. However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use it or name alternatives like ask_about_hubspot_companies, so it stops short of full when/when-not guidance.

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

All YouSpot toolsInspect
Try in Browser
RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A4/5.0
Disambiguation5/5

Each tool targets a distinct resource and action, with clear boundaries even within overlapping domains like LinkedIn (search vs. free-form query vs. profile vs. summary) and graph deletion (soft single, bulk soft, permanent single). Descriptions explicitly cross-reference related tools to prevent misselection.

Naming Consistency4/5

The vast majority follow a consistent verb_noun pattern (get_, list_, search_, create_, delete_, etc.). A few noun-phrase exceptions like linkedin_analytics, mutual_connections, similar_objects, and what_needs_attention deviate slightly, but they are still descriptive and do not create confusion.

Tool Count2/5

At 66 tools this is far beyond the 25+ threshold considered too many, even though the server covers many integration domains. Each domain has a coherent subset, but the overall surface is heavy for agents to navigate and would benefit from consolidation or namespacing.

Completeness4/5

The set provides deep read/search coverage across Gmail, Slack, Calendar, LinkedIn, HubSpot, Obsidian, Twitter, and a graph store, with core write operations for calendar, drafts, Slack, and graph objects. Minor gaps exist—notably no calendar delete, no direct Gmail send to third parties (only drafts), and no LinkedIn post/message actions—but these appear deliberate and do not block typical workflows.

Resources