QuickBooks Online MCP Server

create_account

Creates a chart-of-accounts entry in QuickBooks Online, optionally nesting a sub-account under a parent whose account type must match.

Instructions

Create a chart‑of‑accounts entry in QuickBooks Online. To create a sub‑account (nested under a parent), pass parent_id with the parent account's Id; the new account's AccountType must match the parent's.

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": {
      "params": "<params>"
    },
    "name": "create_account"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`params`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Nov 6, 2026

TDQS

B3/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are supplied, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It does disclose the non-obvious nesting rule, but it says nothing about required fields, permissions, what the response contains, or what happens on error such as a rejected or duplicate account name.

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?

Two sentences, zero filler, and the main action is stated before the sub-account edge case. Nothing is repeated from the schema or padded.

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

Completeness2/5

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

For a nested create tool with no annotations, no output schema and no parameter descriptions in the schema, the description is too thin. An agent still has to guess valid values for the required type field and cannot tell what a successful response looks like.

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% and the schema nests five properties under params, so the description should compensate. It explains only parent_id and one constraint on the account type, leaving name, sub_type, description and the permitted type values undocumented. The description also refers to 'AccountType' while the schema property is 'type', which adds friction.

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 gives a specific verb and resource: 'Create a chart-of-accounts entry in QuickBooks Online.' That verb alone separates it from get_account, update_account and search_accounts, though it never names those siblings or states how the tool differs from them.

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?

It gives one concrete conditional: pass parent_id to build a sub-account, and the new account's AccountType must equal the parent's. That is real usage guidance for one case, but there is no guidance on when to call create_account rather than update_account, and no note on duplicate names or other failure conditions.

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

Deploy Server