Skip to main content
Glama

HelloBooks AI Agents

by ai.hellobooks.agents

partner_program_info

Return the HelloBooks Partner Program structure — free reseller channel for accountants/CPAs/bookkeepers who put their clients on Pro/Business plans. Earned wholesale discount model (no commission): Bronze 5% at 25 pts / Silver 10% at 75 / Gold 15% at 300 / Platinum 20% at 1,000+. Pro client = 1 pt/mo, Business client = 4 pts/mo. Call with no args for the full ladder + meta; with points for current status + how many points to next tier; with proClients and/or businessClients to derive points from the client book and then return the same status verdict. The Partner Program is the cpa plan id in list_plans (the retired $59.99 SKU is gone). HelloCPA Practice Management at practice.hellobooks.ai is a different product and NOT the Partner Program.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
pointsNoCurrent Partner Points total. If supplied, the response includes the partner's status + how many more points are needed to reach the next tier.
proClientsNoActive Pro-plan clients (1 point each per month). Combined with `businessClients` to derive points if `points` is not supplied directly.
businessClientsNoActive Business-plan clients (4 points each per month). Combined with `proClients` to derive points.

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

While no annotations are provided, the description details the behavior: it returns tier structure, status, and points to next tier based on inputs. It also notes that the retired SKU is gone and clarifies identity with a plan ID. It does not explicitly state it's read-only, but that is clear from context.

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

Conciseness4/5

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

The description is a single paragraph that efficiently conveys purpose, usage modes, and distinctions. It is dense but not verbose; some structure (e.g., bullet points) could improve readability, but it remains clear.

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

Completeness4/5

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

Given no output schema, the description explains what is returned for each input scenario (full ladder with no args, status with points, derived status with clients). It also provides necessary context about the partner program's relationship to list_plans and distinguishes a different product.

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

Parameters4/5

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

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema already explains parameters. The description adds value by explaining how points are calculated (1 pt for Pro, 4 pts for Business) and how different parameter combinations map to different outputs.

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

Purpose5/5

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

The description clearly states the tool returns the Partner Program structure, specifies the resource, and distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_plans and a different product (HelloCPA Practice Management).

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description provides explicit guidance on when to use different input combinations (no args, with points, with client counts), and clarifies what the Partner Program is not, preventing misuse.

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

All HelloBooks AI Agents toolsInspect
Try in Browser
RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A3.9/5.0
Disambiguation5/5

Each tool has a clearly distinct purpose, with detailed descriptions that specify the exact input and use case. Even similar tools like QBO vs Xero journal analyzers are differentiated by source system and specific checks, leaving no ambiguity.

Naming Consistency4/5

The majority of tools follow a verb_noun snake_case pattern (e.g., analyze_balance_sheet, list_features). A few exceptions like how_munimji_helps and feature_search deviate slightly, but overall the convention is consistent and readable.

Tool Count4/5

With 26 tools covering financial analysis, compliance, migration, and product info, the count is on the higher side but justified by the breadth of the accounting domain. Each tool serves a specific need without redundancy.

Completeness4/5

The tool set covers all major financial statement checks (balance sheet, P&L, trial balance, journal entries), compliance, migration, and product details. A notable gap is the lack of cash flow analysis, but the set is otherwise comprehensive for its scope.

Resources