Skip to main content
Glama

Hubspot

by io.github.pipeworx-io

Hs Get Deal

hs_get_deal
Read-onlyIdempotent

Fetch a deal's full details by ID. Returns deal name, amount, stage, owner, and linked contacts and companies.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYesHubSpot deal ID

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idNoDeal ID
archivedNoWhether deal is archived
createdAtNoCreation timestamp
updatedAtNoLast update timestamp
propertiesNoDeal properties (name, amount, stage, owner, linked contacts/companies)

Schema Changelog

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

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "properties": {
+    "archived": {
+      "description": "Whether deal is archived",
+      "type": "boolean"
+    },
+    "createdAt": {
+      "description": "Creation timestamp",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "id": {
+      "description": "Deal ID",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "properties": {
+      "description": "Deal properties (name, amount, stage, owner, linked contacts/companies)",
+      "type": "object"
+    },
+    "updatedAt": {
+      "description": "Last update timestamp",
+      "type": "string"
+    }
+  },
+  "type": "object"
+}
  2. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / examples
      Added value: +[
+  {
+    "id": "54321"
+  }
+]
  3. First observed

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, covering safety. The description adds value by specifying the data returned (deal details plus linked contacts and companies), which goes beyond the annotations. No contradictions.

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?

Two concise sentences with front-loaded action and immediate value. No unnecessary words.

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 a single required parameter and the presence of an output schema, the description provides sufficient context (returned fields) to set expectations. No further details are needed.

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?

The input schema has 100% coverage for the single 'id' parameter, described as 'HubSpot deal ID'. The description does not add further detail (e.g., format or example), so it meets the baseline.

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 clearly states the action ('Fetch a deal's full details by ID') and specifies the resource ('deal'). It lists the key fields returned (deal name, amount, stage, owner, linked contacts and companies), distinguishing it from sibling tools like hs_get_company or hs_get_contact.

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?

While no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use is given, the description clearly implies usage for retrieving a single deal by ID. The sibling context (e.g., hs_list_deals for listing) provides implicit differentiation. A brief mention of when to prefer hs_get_deal over hs_list_deals would improve clarity.

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

All Hubspot 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

A3.5/5.0
Disambiguation2/5

Several tools are near-duplicates or overlapping entry points: ask_pipeworx, ask_pipeworx_beta, ask_pipeworx_grounded, deep_research, discover_tools, and suggest_questions all serve overlapping query/discovery purposes. The polymarket tools and HubSpot tools are more distinct, but the set as a whole has fuzzy boundaries between many members.

Naming Consistency2/5

Naming is inconsistent across the set: HubSpot tools use an hs_ prefix, Pipeworx tools mostly use bare verbs (ask_pipeworx, recall, forget), and other tools mix styles (ai_visibility_check, generate_llms_txt, polymarket_edges). The hs_* subset is consistent, but overall there is no single predictable pattern.

Tool Count2/5

38 tools is too many for the apparent scope, especially since the server is named 'Hubspot' but only 6 of the tools are HubSpot-specific. A large portion of the catalog covers unrelated Pipeworx data access, prediction markets, memory, and npm scanning, making the set feel bloated and unfocused.

Completeness2/5

The HubSpot portion of the tool set is read-only: it can get, list, and search companies/contacts/deals, but has no create, update, or delete operations, leaving obvious lifecycle gaps. If the intended domain is actually Pipeworx/data research, the HubSpot tools seem like an unrelated afterthought, so the surface is incomplete for either interpretation.

Resources