Skip to main content
Glama

Caribooks (QuickBooks Online)

get balance sheet

get_balance_sheet
Read-only

Generate the QuickBooks balance sheet report. Returns { columns, column_types, rows }: each row has a type (section | data | total), a depth, and values aligned to columns (Money cells as numbers, first cell is the label on summary reports); id is the label cell's QuickBooks record id (e.g. the account); on detail reports ids aligns to values instead. All-zero rows are omitted and counted in hidden_zero_rows. filters lists the filters QuickBooks confirms it applied (a parameter it ignored is absent), and no_data: true means the period has nothing to report.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
paramsNoQuickBooks report query parameters: start_date, end_date (YYYY-MM-DD) or date_macro (Today, Yesterday, This Week, Last Week, This Month, Last Month, This Month-to-date, This Fiscal Quarter, Last Fiscal Quarter, This Fiscal Year, Last Fiscal Year, This Fiscal Year-to-date, Last Fiscal Year-to-date, ...); accounting_method (Cash|Accrual); summarize_column_by (Total|Month|Quarter|Year|Week|Days|Classes|Departments|Customers|Vendors|Employees|ProductsAndServices); the filters customer, vendor, item, class, department (QuickBooks Ids, comma-separated for several); adjusted_gain_loss (true|false).
companyNoWhich connected QuickBooks company to use (name, realm id, or connection id). Optional when only one company is connected.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4.1/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

The description richly discloses behavior beyond the readOnlyHint/destructiveHint annotations: row types, depth, Money cell representation, id alignment on summary vs detail reports, hidden_zero_rows, the filters field reflecting confirmed/applied parameters, and no_data semantics. This gives the agent a strong model of what the tool returns and how it behaves.

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 front-loaded with the tool's purpose and then packs complex return-format details into two dense sentences with no filler. Every clause adds needed information about row structure, money values, ids, hidden rows, filters, and no_data. It is appropriately sized for a report with no output schema.

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

Completeness5/5

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

Given there is no output schema, the description thoroughly explains the return shape and edge cases, including id alignment, hidden_zero_rows, filters, and no_data. Combined with 100% parameter schema coverage and safety annotations, the description provides everything needed to invoke and interpret the tool correctly.

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

Parameters3/5

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

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents all parameters thoroughly. The description adds context about the returned filters field showing which parameters were applied, but it does not add new meaning to the input parameters themselves. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 uses a specific verb and resource: 'Generate the QuickBooks balance sheet report.' It clearly states what the tool does. However, it does not explicitly distinguish itself from the sibling tools get_balance_sheet_detail and get_balance_sheet_summary, so it is clear but lacks direct sibling differentiation.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

The intended use is implied by 'Generate the QuickBooks balance sheet report,' but the description does not state when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_balance_sheet_detail or get_balance_sheet_summary. There are no exclusions or alternative-selection conditions, leaving some inference to the agent.

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

Try in Browser

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources