QuickBooks Desktop MCP

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

qb_create_item

Creates a new non-inventory QuickBooks item after you search existing items and explicitly confirm; uses a two-step preview and confirmation flow to prevent duplicates.

Instructions

Creates a non-inventory item (max 31 characters, no ':'). Use only after the user explicitly asked for a NEW item; search first with qb_search_items. manufacturer_part_number can hold an article code so qb_search_items finds it. 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>",
      "income_account": "<income_account>"
    },
    "name": "qb_create_item"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`name`	Yes
`price`	No
`run_id`	No
`description`	No
`confirm_code`	No
`income_account`	Yes
`sales_tax_code`	No
`expected_company_file`	No
`manufacturer_part_number`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.2.0Nov 1, 2026

TDQS

A4.2/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare the write, non-idempotent, non-destructive, closed-world profile, and the description adds genuinely new behavior: a two-step preview + confirm_code flow and hard naming constraints (31 chars, no ':'). It stops short of explaining what confirm_code contains or how run_id ties into the preview, so not a 5.

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?

Four short sentences, front-loaded with the core action and constraints, then the prerequisite, then the workflow note. No filler and nothing buried.

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?

For a 9-parameter mutation with no output schema and no annotation-level detail on the confirm flow, the description covers the workflow shape and naming rules but leaves most parameters and the preview/confirm mechanics underspecified.

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% across 9 parameters, so the description must carry the load, yet it only explains name (length/character rules) and manufacturer_part_number (article-code trick) plus an oblique mention of confirm_code. Required income_account, plus price, run_id, description, sales_tax_code, and expected_company_file are left entirely undefined.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Creates a non-inventory item') and immediately scopes it against the sibling qb_search_items, so an agent can distinguish create from search without opening either schema.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

Explicitly says when to use it ('only after the user explicitly asked for a NEW item') and names the prerequisite alternative ('search first with qb_search_items'), which is exactly the when/when-not/alternative pattern.

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