Skip to main content
Glama

Caribooks (QuickBooks Online)

get inventory valuation summary

get_inventory_valuation_summary
Read-only

Generate the QuickBooks inventory valuation summary 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: report_date (YYYY-MM-DD, the as-of date; defaults to today) 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, ...); summarize_column_by (Total|Month|Quarter|Year|Week|Days|Classes|Departments|Customers|Vendors|Employees|ProductsAndServices); item.
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

A3.8/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already indicate read-only and non-destructive, so description need not repeat that. The description adds rich behavior: return format details (columns, rows with types/depth, Money cells as numbers), the id alignment difference between summary and detail reports, omission of zero-rows with a counter, filters list inclusion, and no_data flag. This is valuable beyond annotations.

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 one dense paragraph, front-loaded with the report generation purpose. It packs a lot of details, but could be broken into bullet points for easier scanning. However, every sentence adds value, so it remains efficient.

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 the complexity of the return structure and no output schema, the description does a good job explaining the format, including edge cases like zero-rows and no_data. It lacks details on pagination or max depth but is sufficient for an agent to interpret results correctly.

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 coverage is 100% and includes descriptions for report_date, date_macro, summarize_column_by, and company. The description adds only a bit about filters and no_data, but baseline is 3 due to high coverage; the added detail about filter behavior pushes it to 4.

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 it generates a QuickBooks inventory valuation summary report. It distinguishes itself from the sibling get_inventory_valuation_detail by focusing on 'summary' and describing a summary-specific structure. However, it doesn't explicitly compare to the detail tool by name.

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 description implies usage for summary-level inventory valuation reports, and its focus on summary report structure differentiates it from detail reports. However, it does not explicitly state when to prefer this over the detail counterpart or other inventory reports, and there are no exclusion conditions or alternative tool names mentioned.

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