Skip to main content
Glama

Caribooks (QuickBooks Online)

get profit and loss

get_profit_and_loss
Read-only

Generate the QuickBooks profit and loss 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

A3.8/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already indicate read-only and non-destructive behavior. The description adds significant behavioral context beyond annotations: explains row types, how Money cells are represented, id assignment, omission of zero rows, the meaning of filters and no_data. This fully discloses behavior without contradicting 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 dense but well-organized, front-loading the core purpose and then explaining response details. It is longer than minimal but every sentence carries functional information, so it earns a 4 for structure without excessive fluff.

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 there is no output schema, the description covers return structure, edge cases, and filter semantics comprehensively. It does not, however, contrast with get_profit_and_loss_detail or mention pagination/limits, which would make it fully complete for an agent.

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 all parameters are documented. The description adds valuable semantic detail beyond the schema, such as how filters behave when ignored and the significance of hidden_zero_rows. This enriches parameter understanding without redundancy.

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 tool generates the QuickBooks profit and loss report and specifies the return structure. It distinguishes itself implicitly from get_profit_and_loss_detail by name, but does not explicitly mention the sibling or the difference, so it falls short of a 5.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus the related get_profit_and_loss_detail or other report tools. The description focuses on how to use parameters and interpret output, but lacks any explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use instructions.

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