HubSpot MCP Server

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It states the tool archives (deletes) multiple objects, implying a destructive mutation, but lacks details on permissions required, whether deletions are reversible, rate limits, error handling for partial failures, or confirmation prompts. The parenthetical '(delete)' clarifies the destructive nature, but more behavioral context is needed for a mutation tool.

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 with zero wasted words. It front-loads the core action and resource, making it easy to scan and understand quickly.

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?

For a destructive batch operation with no annotations, 0% schema description coverage, and no output schema, the description is insufficient. It doesn't cover critical aspects like side effects, return values, error conditions, or usage constraints, leaving significant gaps for an AI agent to use the tool safely and effectively.

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%, so the description must compensate. It mentions 'multiple CRM objects' hinting at objectIds as an array, but doesn't explain objectType enum values or constraints (e.g., ID formats, batch size limits). The description adds minimal value beyond the schema, resulting in a baseline score for inadequate parameter explanation.

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 ('Archive (delete) multiple CRM objects') and resource ('CRM objects') with the scope of 'in a single request.' It distinguishes from single-object operations but doesn't explicitly differentiate from other batch archive tools like 'crm_batch_archive_associations' or domain-specific batch archives (e.g., 'calls_batch_archive').

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. It doesn't mention prerequisites (e.g., permissions), compare to 'crm_archive_object' for single objects, or specify scenarios where batch archiving is appropriate versus individual deletions.

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