HubSpot MCP Server

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It states 'create' implying a write operation but fails to mention permissions required, side effects, whether the creation is reversible, rate limits, or what happens on success/failure. For a mutation tool with 11 parameters, this lack of behavioral context is inadequate.

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 no wasted words. It is front-loaded and appropriately sized for its content, though the brevity contributes to its inadequacy in other dimensions. The structure is clear but under-specified.

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?

Given the complexity (11 parameters, 5 required), 0% schema description coverage, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is severely incomplete. It does not compensate for the lack of structured data, failing to provide necessary context for a mutation tool with multiple parameters and enums.

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?

The schema description coverage is 0%, meaning none of the 11 parameters have descriptions in the schema. The tool description adds no parameter information beyond the name, failing to explain what 'name', 'label', 'type', 'fieldType', 'groupName', or other parameters mean. This leaves all parameters undocumented.

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 'Create a new lead property' restates the tool name (crm_create_lead_property) with minimal elaboration. It specifies the verb 'create' and resource 'lead property' but lacks detail on what a lead property is or how it differs from similar tools like crm_create_company_property or crm_create_contact_property. This is a tautology with no sibling differentiation.

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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There is no mention of prerequisites, when this tool is appropriate, or what distinguishes it from other property creation tools (e.g., crm_create_company_property). This absence of context leaves the agent without usage direction.

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