Skip to main content
Glama

Caribooks (QuickBooks Online)

get transaction list by customer

get_transaction_list_by_customer
Read-only

Generate the QuickBooks transaction list by customer 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, ...); start_duedate, end_duedate (YYYY-MM-DD); customer, department; transaction_type (Invoice, ReceivePayment, Bill, BillPaymentCheck, Check, CreditCardCharge, Deposit, JournalEntry, Transfer, SalesReceipt, CreditMemo, Estimate, PurchaseOrder, VendorCredit, ...), source_account_type (Bank, AccountsReceivable, AccountsPayable, Income, Expense, CreditCard, ...), docnum, memo, cleared (Cleared|Uncleared|Reconciled), arpaid/appaid (All|Paid|Unpaid), bothamount (an exact amount), payment_method, term, group_by (Name|Account|Transaction Type|Customer|Vendor|Employee|Location|Payment Method|Day|Week|Month|Quarter|Year|None), start_createdate/end_createdate, start_moddate/end_moddate; sort_by (tx_date,txn_type,doc_num,name,memo,account_name,other_account,due_date,pmt_mthd,is_cleared,dept_name), sort_order (ascend|descend); this report does not accept a columns parameter.
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

A4.3/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

The description adds substantial behavioral detail beyond annotations: it explains the return format, row types, hidden_zero_rows, filters, and no_data semantics. It also clarifies that ignored parameters are absent from filters. With readOnlyHint and destructiveHint already set, the description enriches the behavioral profile 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.

Conciseness5/5

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

The description is a single, dense paragraph that front-loads the purpose and then details output structure and edge cases. Every sentence contributes necessary information without redundancy or filler.

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?

For a report tool with complex output and many parameters, the description is complete. It explains the return object, row types, ids, filtering behavior, and no_data flag. Since there is no output schema, the description carries the full burden of explaining the return value, and it does so thoroughly.

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?

The schema provides 100% description coverage for all parameters, so the baseline is 3. The description does not add parameter-specific meaning beyond what the schema already explains; it only notes that a columns parameter is not accepted, which is also in the schema.

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's purpose: 'Generate the QuickBooks transaction list by customer report.' It specifies the verb and resource, and details the output structure. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like get_transaction_list and get_transaction_list_by_vendor by focusing on the customer dimension.

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?

Usage is implied by the name and description ('transaction list by customer'), but there is no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as get_transaction_list_by_vendor or get_transaction_list_with_splits. No exclusions or alternative conditions are stated.

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