HubSpot MCP Server

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the tool archives/deletes notes, implying a destructive mutation, but lacks details on permissions, reversibility, rate limits, or response format. The mention of 'single request' hints at efficiency but doesn't clarify batch size limits or error handling.

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 front-loads the core action and resource. There is no wasted verbiage, and it directly communicates the tool's purpose without redundancy.

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 destructive nature, lack of annotations, 0% schema coverage, and no output schema, the description is insufficient. It doesn't address critical aspects like safety warnings, input validation, or what happens post-archive, leaving significant gaps for an AI agent to operate safely.

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 for undocumented parameters. It mentions 'multiple notes' but doesn't explain the 'noteIds' parameter's format, constraints, or expected values. No additional semantic context is provided beyond what's implied by the tool name.

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 notes') with the scope 'in a single request.' It distinguishes from sibling 'notes_archive' by specifying batch capability, though it doesn't explicitly contrast with other batch operations like 'notes_batch_create' or 'notes_batch_update.'

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 'notes_archive' for single notes or other batch operations. The description implies batch deletion but doesn't specify prerequisites, limitations, or contextual triggers for choosing this method.

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