hubspot_find_across

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavior. It explicitly states READ-ONLY and explains that the tool reports which portals matched, giving useful behavioral context. It stops short of describing edge cases such as no matches or error behavior, but for a read-only search this is reasonably transparent.

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 only two sentences, with no wasted words. The core behavior is front-loaded first, followed by a practical usage guideline and example, making it easy to scan.

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 tool with three clearly schema-documented parameters and no output schema, the description covers the essential context: what it searches, the read-only nature, and what it reports. It could add more detail about the response shape or pagination, but the description is 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 input schema already documents all three parameters fully, covering query, limit, and object with defaults, ranges, and valid values. Since schema coverage is 100%, the description adds little beyond the tool-level cross-portal behavior, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 names the verb 'Search', the resource 'ALL connected HubSpot portals at once', and the distinctive behavior of reporting which portal(s) matched. It also contrasts implicitly with the sibling hubspot_search by emphasizing cross-portal coverage.

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?

The description gives an explicit use case: use when the user does not know which portal a record lives in, with a concrete example. It does not explicitly name an alternative tool or state when not to use it, but the context is clear enough for an agent to route appropriately.

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