HubSpot MCP Server

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. The description only states 'List all tasks with optional filtering', which doesn't reveal any behavioral traits such as pagination behavior (implied by 'limit' and 'after' parameters but not described), rate limits, authentication needs, whether it's read-only (implied but not explicit), or what happens with archived tasks (related to 'archived' parameter). This leaves significant gaps for an agent to understand how the tool behaves beyond basic listing.

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, concise sentence: 'List all tasks with optional filtering'. It's front-loaded with the core action and resource, with no wasted words. However, it's overly brief given the complexity of 5 undocumented parameters, which could benefit from slightly more detail without sacrificing efficiency.

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 address key aspects like parameter meanings, behavioral traits (e.g., pagination, handling of archived tasks), or how it differs from sibling tools. For a list tool with multiple filtering options, more context is needed to guide effective use by an AI agent.

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 mentions 'optional filtering' but doesn't specify what parameters are available or their meanings. With 5 parameters and 0% schema description coverage, the schema provides no descriptions for any parameters. The description fails to compensate by explaining parameters like 'limit', 'after', 'properties', 'associations', or 'archived', leaving their semantics unclear beyond what can be inferred from names and types.

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 'List all tasks with optional filtering' clearly states the verb ('List') and resource ('tasks'), making the basic purpose understandable. However, it lacks specificity about what kind of tasks (e.g., CRM tasks, project tasks) and doesn't differentiate from sibling tools like 'tasks_search' or 'tasks_get' beyond the mention of 'optional filtering' which is vague.

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 explicit guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'tasks_search' or 'tasks_get'. The phrase 'optional filtering' hints at some usage context but doesn't clarify what filtering options exist or when to choose this over other list/search tools. There's no mention of prerequisites, exclusions, or specific scenarios for application.

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