Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
HubSpot MCP

HubSpot MCP

by shinzo-labs
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Hybrid

emails_get

Retrieve detailed information about a specific email, including properties and associated entities like contacts, companies, deals, or tickets, using the HubSpot MCP server.

Instructions

Get details of a specific email

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "emailId": "<emailId>"
    },
    "name": "emails_get"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
associationsNo
emailIdYes
propertiesNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.0.0

TDQS

C2.8/5.0
Behavior2/5

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 it 'gets details' but doesn't clarify if this is a read-only operation, what permissions are required, whether it's idempotent, or how errors are handled. This leaves significant gaps for a tool that likely accesses sensitive data.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single, clear sentence with no wasted words. It's front-loaded with the core purpose, making it easy to scan and understand immediately.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness2/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a tool with 3 parameters, 0% schema coverage, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is insufficient. It doesn't explain what 'details' include, how to use optional parameters, or what the return format looks like, leaving too much undefined for effective use.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters2/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The schema has 0% description coverage, so the description must compensate. It mentions 'a specific email' which hints at the emailId parameter but doesn't explain the associations or properties parameters at all. This leaves two of three parameters undocumented, failing to address the coverage gap.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the verb ('Get') and resource ('details of a specific email'), making the purpose understandable. However, it doesn't differentiate from sibling tools like emails_list or emails_search, which also retrieve email information but with different scopes or filters.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

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 prerequisites (e.g., needing an email ID), contrast with emails_list for bulk retrieval, or specify use cases like fetching metadata for a known email.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools

Related Tools