QuickBooks Desktop MCP

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

qb_create_customer

Creates a customer in QuickBooks Desktop with contact, billing address, and currency details, using a preview-and-confirm step that blocks duplicate names before saving.

Instructions

Creates a customer. bill_address: {"lines": [..max 5], "city", "state", "postal_code", "country"}, or the form qb_search_customers returns ({"Addr1".."Addr5", "City", "State", "PostalCode", "Country"}); unknown keys are refused. currency: ISO code or QuickBooks name (multicurrency only; cannot be changed later once used). Refuses if a customer with this exact name exists. Two steps (preview + confirm_code).

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "name": "<name>"
    },
    "name": "qb_create_customer"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`name`	Yes
`email`	No
`phone`	No
`run_id`	No
`contact`	No
`currency`	No
`bill_address`	No
`company_name`	No
`confirm_code`	No
`account_number`	No
`sales_tax_code`	No
`expected_company_file`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.2.0Nov 1, 2026

TDQS

B3.2/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already establish that this is a non-read-only, non-idempotent, non-destructive create operation. The description adds meaningful behavior beyond that: duplicate-name refusal, a two-step preview plus confirm_code flow, unknown bill_address keys being refused, and currency becoming immutable once used.

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 compact and front-loads the main action. The remaining sentences carry useful constraints, though the bill_address notation is dense and could be slightly clearer.

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?

Given a 12-parameter mutation with no output schema and 0% schema description coverage, the description covers key behavioral constraints and the most complex parameter. However, it is not complete enough for an agent to confidently infer the meaning of all optional parameters or what the preview step returns.

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

Parameters2/5

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

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It explains bill_address in detail and gives semantics for currency and confirm_code, but it leaves most of the 12 parameters undocumented, including sales_tax_code, expected_company_file, contact, run_id, and account_number.

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?

States a specific verb and resource: 'Creates a customer.' This clearly distinguishes it from read/search siblings such as qb_search_customers. It does not explicitly contrast with qb_add_vendor or other write tools, but the purpose is unambiguous.

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 implies usage by saying it creates a customer and refuses duplicates, but it does not explicitly say when to use this tool versus qb_search_customers or qb_check_duplicate. There is no direct when-not guidance or named alternative.

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