HubSpot MCP Server

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavior. It mentions 'Archive (delete)', implying a destructive mutation, but fails to specify permissions required, whether deletions are reversible, rate limits, or error handling for invalid IDs. This leaves significant gaps in understanding the tool's operational traits.

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 that directly states the tool's function without unnecessary words. It's front-loaded and wastes no space, making it easy to parse 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 coverage, and no output schema, the description is inadequate. It doesn't cover critical aspects like return values, error conditions, or behavioral nuances, leaving the agent poorly informed about how to use the tool 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%, but the description adds no parameter details beyond implying 'meetingIds' are needed. It doesn't explain the format of IDs, array size limits, or validation rules. With one parameter, the baseline is 4, but the lack of any semantic clarification reduces this to 3.

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)') and resource ('multiple meetings'), making the purpose evident. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'meetings_archive' (single vs. batch) or 'calls_batch_archive' (meetings vs. calls), which prevents a perfect score.

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 like 'meetings_archive' for single meetings or other batch operations. It lacks context about prerequisites, such as needing meeting IDs, or exclusions, leaving the agent with minimal usage direction.

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