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 mentions 'archive (delete)' which implies a destructive operation, but doesn't clarify if this is permanent deletion, soft deletion, reversible, or what permissions are required. No information about rate limits, side effects, or response format is included.

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 at just three words, front-loading the essential information with zero wasted text. Every word earns its place by specifying both the action and target resource.

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 operation tool with no annotations, no output schema, and incomplete parameter documentation, the description is inadequate. It should address critical behavioral aspects like permanence, reversibility, permissions, and what happens to associated data when a task is archived.

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 description doesn't mention the 'taskId' parameter at all, and with 0% schema description coverage, the schema provides no parameter documentation either. However, since there's only one required parameter and its purpose is reasonably inferable from the tool name, the baseline of 3 is appropriate despite the lack of explicit parameter information.

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 ('a task'), making the purpose immediately understandable. However, it doesn't differentiate this tool from its sibling 'tasks_batch_archive', which handles multiple tasks, leaving some ambiguity about when to use each.

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 about when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'tasks_batch_archive' for multiple tasks or 'tasks_update' for modifying instead of archiving. The description lacks context about prerequisites, permissions, or typical use cases.

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