Skip to main content
Glama
QuickBooks Desktop MCP

QuickBooks Desktop MCP

by Compolaga

qb_create_invoice

Creates a QuickBooks invoice from customer and line items using a preview and confirm code, and validates the subtotal before booking to prevent incorrect totals or duplicate reference numbers.

Instructions

Creates an invoice.

lines, in invoice order: item line {"item": exact item full name, "description", "quantity", "rate"} (or "amount" instead of quantity x rate), optional "sales_tax_code" per line; text-only line (e.g. a product-group heading) {"description": "..."} without item. sales_tax_code: default SalesTaxCodeRef for item lines (e.g. "Non"). currency: optional check -- refused if the customer's currency differs (the invoice currency is always the customer's currency). exchange_rate: home-currency units per 1 unit of invoice currency. expected_total: the invoice SUBTOTAL, i.e. the sum of the lines excluding sales tax. Refused before booking if the lines add up to something else; checked again after booking against QuickBooks' own Subtotal, and an invoice that differs is removed again immediately. Without expected_total the same check is made against the subtotal of the preview. Sales tax is computed by QuickBooks on top and returned as sales_tax_total / total. Refuses a ref_number that already exists, unknown customer or items. 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": {
      "customer": "<customer>",
      "txn_date": "<txn_date>",
      "ref_number": "<ref_number>",
      "lines": "<lines>"
    },
    "name": "qb_create_invoice"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
memoNo
linesYes
termsNo
run_idNo
currencyNo
customerYes
due_dateNo
templateNo
txn_dateYes
po_numberNo
ar_accountNo
ref_numberYes
confirm_codeNo
exchange_rateNo
expected_totalNo
sales_tax_codeNo
expected_company_fileNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.2.0

TDQS

A3.9/5.0
Behavior5/5

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 mutation. The description adds substantial behavioral context beyond annotations: the two-step preview/confirm flow, pre-booking expected_total validation, post-booking subtotal verification with immediate removal on mismatch, QuickBooks-computed sales tax, and specific refusal conditions.

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 front-loaded with the core action and then organized around line structure, tax, currency, validation, and the two-step flow. It is dense but appropriate for a complex invoice-creation tool; most sentences carry useful information, though the length is substantial.

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?

For a complex 17-parameter mutation with no output schema, the description covers the critical behavioral and validation details an agent needs to invoke it correctly. It mentions returned sales_tax_total/total and the preview/confirm requirement. Some optional parameter semantics remain unexplained, preventing a 5.

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 0% across 17 parameters, so the description must compensate. It does explain the most complex parameters well—lines, sales_tax_code, currency, exchange_rate, expected_total, ref_number, customer, and confirm_code via the two-step flow—but leaves memo, terms, due_date, template, po_number, ar_account, run_id, and expected_company_file undocumented.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: "Creates an invoice." It then details line structure and validation behavior, making the tool's purpose clear. It does not explicitly differentiate itself from siblings such as qb_add_transaction, 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 Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description explains important usage conditions: two-step preview plus confirm_code, duplicate ref_number refusal, unknown customer/item refusal, and currency mismatch refusal. However, it does not explicitly say when to use this tool versus alternatives like qb_add_transaction or qb_receive_payment, leaving that to inference.

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