hubspot_get_deal_notes

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 'Get notes' which implies a read-only operation, but doesn't mention any behavioral traits like pagination (implied by the 'after' parameter in schema), rate limits, authentication needs, or what happens if the deal ID is invalid. For a tool with 3 parameters and no annotation coverage, this leaves significant gaps in understanding how the tool behaves.

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, efficient sentence that directly states the tool's purpose without any fluff. It's appropriately sized for a simple retrieval tool and front-loads the core functionality. Every word earns its place, making it easy to parse quickly.

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 moderate complexity (3 parameters, no output schema, no annotations), the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain what the tool returns (e.g., note objects with fields like content, author, timestamp), how pagination works with the 'after' parameter, or error conditions. For a data retrieval tool without output schema, more context about return values would be helpful.

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 adds no parameter semantics beyond what's already in the schema, which has 100% coverage with clear descriptions for all 3 parameters (dealId, limit, after). The baseline is 3 since the schema does the heavy lifting, but the description doesn't compensate with additional context like format examples or usage tips for the parameters.

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 verb 'Get' and the resource 'notes associated with a specific deal', making the purpose immediately understandable. It distinguishes this tool from siblings like hubspot_get_deal (which gets deal details) and hubspot_get_deal_history (which gets deal history). However, it doesn't specify the scope of notes (e.g., all notes vs recent notes), which prevents a perfect score.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention when to use hubspot_get_engagements_by_deal (which might include notes as part of engagements) or hubspot_get_deal_history (which might overlap with note history). There's no context about prerequisites, such as needing an existing deal ID, or limitations like pagination requirements.

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