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 but only states it searches with filters. It doesn't disclose critical behavioral traits like whether it's read-only, pagination behavior (implied by 'limit' and 'after' params but not explained), rate limits, authentication needs, or what happens on errors. This is inadequate for a search tool with complex parameters.

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 waste. It's appropriately sized and front-loaded, though this conciseness comes at the cost of completeness.

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 tool's complexity (5 parameters, 0% schema coverage, no annotations, no output schema), the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain parameter usage, behavioral expectations, or output format, making it insufficient for an AI agent to use the tool effectively beyond basic intent.

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 but only vaguely mentions 'specific filters'. It doesn't explain any of the 5 parameters (e.g., filterGroups structure, properties, limit, after, sorts) or their semantics, leaving them undocumented. This fails to add meaning beyond the bare schema.

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 'Search emails with specific filters' clearly states the verb (search) and resource (emails), but it's vague about scope and doesn't distinguish from sibling tools like emails_list or emails_get. It specifies 'with specific filters' which adds some context but remains general.

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 like emails_list or emails_search from other domains (e.g., crm_search_contacts). The description implies filtering is needed but doesn't specify scenarios or exclusions, leaving the agent to infer usage.

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