hubspot_list_imports

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

Annotations carry the basic safety profile (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=true). The description adds context that the tool routes through the domain-agent dispatcher under JWT/tenant/company scope, which is useful but generic. It does not disclose potential side effects or the meaning of the destructive flag, and it does not contradict the annotations.

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 short and front-loaded with the action name. The argument list is compact and the routing context is brief. No obvious fluff, though the content is under-specified.

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?

Despite having an output schema and annotations, the description is missing the core functional context: what list_imports actually does and what should go into 'inputs'. For a dispatcher-style tool with two free-form parameters, an agent needs more specific instructions on expected input structure and use cases. The generic boilerplate is not sufficient for correct invocation.

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 schema has no descriptions (0% coverage), so the description must compensate. It labels message as 'Free-text objective' and inputs as 'Optional JSON string of structured inputs', which is minimal and generic. It provides no tool-specific guidance on what structured inputs list_imports expects, so an agent still cannot determine how to craft a valid invocation.

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 merely says 'Run the hubspot domain agent action `list_imports`', which is essentially an instruction to execute the action named by the tool. It never states that this tool lists HubSpot imports or what the action accomplishes. The routing and scope details do not clarify the functional purpose, so the description is close to a tautology.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. No mention of what problem it solves, no exclusions, and no distinction from other hubspot_list_* tools or domain-agent dispatcher actions. The description leaves an agent without any context to choose this tool over its siblings.

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