Skip to main content
Glama

Caribooks (QuickBooks Online)

search payment methods

search_payment_methods
Read-only

Search payment method records in QuickBooks Online.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
companyNoWhich connected QuickBooks company to use (name, realm id, or connection id). Optional when only one company is connected.
criteriaNoCriteria accepts: an array of {field, value, operator} objects (operators: =, <, >, <=, >=, LIKE with % wildcards, IN), a simple {Field: value} object, or {criteria: [...], asc|desc: "Field", limit, offset, count}. Filters are ANDed; QuickBooks has no OR, cannot filter on Line fields, and only filters top-level fields (TxnDate, DocNumber, CustomerRef, VendorRef, Balance, TotalAmt, DueDate, MetaData.LastUpdatedTime, ...). Field names and values are case-sensitive as QuickBooks stores them. Government identifiers, birth dates and card-processing details are not available through these tools. One call returns one page of at most 1000 records, and a large page is truncated to fit the answer: narrow with filters or walk it with limit and offset rather than asking for everything. Inactive records are left out unless Active is filtered explicitly (Active: false, or Active IN (true, false) for both). Omit to return the first page of all payment_method records.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

C2.9/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, but the description adds no behavioral context such as pagination limits, inactive record exclusion, or field-filter restrictions. The schema's criteria description covers these behaviors, but the description itself contributes zero additional transparency.

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, efficient sentence that front-loads the core purpose with no wasted words. While it is under-specified, that is a completeness issue rather than a conciseness or structure problem.

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

Completeness3/5

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

The tool has a complex, flexible criteria parameter and no output schema, yet the description offers only a bare statement of purpose. The extensive schema description partially compensates, but the description itself fails to summarize search behavior or result characteristics, leaving the agent to infer capability from the schema alone.

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%, with both 'company' and 'criteria' fully documented in the input schema. The description adds no extra parameter meaning, but at this high coverage level the baseline of 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 states a specific verb 'search' and resource 'payment method records' within QuickBooks Online, clearly separating it from create/update/delete siblings. It does not explicitly contrast with get_payment_method, but the plural 'records' signals a list-oriented search, making the purpose fairly clear.

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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_payment_method or other search_* tools. The only usage hints live in the criteria parameter's schema description (e.g., filtering, pagination), not in the tool description itself, leaving the agent to discover them.

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