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 'Create a new note', implying a write operation, but doesn't mention permissions, side effects, or response format. This is a significant gap for a mutation tool, as the agent lacks context on what happens upon invocation.

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 extremely concise with a single sentence, 'Create a new note', which is front-loaded and wastes no words. While it may be under-specified, it earns full marks for brevity and clarity within its limited scope.

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 (2 parameters with nested objects, 0% schema coverage, no annotations, and no output schema), the description is incomplete. It doesn't address parameter meanings, behavioral traits, or output, making it inadequate for the agent to use the tool effectively without additional context.

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 schema provides no descriptions for the 2 parameters. The description adds no information about parameters, failing to compensate for this gap. It doesn't explain what 'properties' or 'associations' mean, leaving the agent to guess based on property names alone.

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 note' clearly states the action (create) and resource (note), which is adequate for basic understanding. However, it doesn't differentiate from sibling tools like 'notes_batch_create' or specify what kind of note (e.g., CRM note, engagement note), making it somewhat vague compared to more specific alternatives.

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_batch_create' or 'engagement_details_create'. The description lacks context about prerequisites, such as required associations or ownership, leaving the agent to infer usage from the schema alone.

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