QuickBooks Online MCP Server

create_credit_memo

Creates a customer credit memo in QuickBooks Online from line items and a customer ID, enabling recording of credits or refunds.

Instructions

Create a credit memo (customer credit) in QuickBooks Online.

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_credit_memo"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`params`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Nov 6, 2026

TDQS

C2.6/5.0

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 burden, yet it only implies mutation through the verb 'create'. It says nothing about the effect on customer balance, whether the memo posts to the ledger, permission requirements, or what identifies the created record. Only the bare minimum is conveyed.

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?

It is a single front-loaded sentence with no filler, which suits the format. However, it is arguably too terse for a nested-object creation tool, so the brevity is as much under-specification as economy.

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?

This is a mutation tool with a nested line-item array, no annotations, and no output schema, so the description should explain required inputs, the customer-credit concept, and what is returned. It supplies none of this, leaving an agent unable to call it correctly without deep schema inspection.

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

Parameters1/5

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

The description mentions no parameters at all. The top-level 'params' object is undocumented in both schema and description, and required fields (customer_ref, line_items), the tax semantics of global_tax_calculation, and the US/non-US tax_code_ref behavior are only discoverable by reading the nested schema. The description adds zero meaning beyond the schema.

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 credit memo') and adds the clarifying gloss 'customer credit', which separates it from create_vendor_credit in the sibling list. It does not explicitly name the siblings (get/update/delete/search_credit_memos), but the create/get/update/delete/search naming pattern makes the role obvious.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this versus create_refund_receipt, create_invoice, or create_vendor_credit, and no preconditions are stated. The agent must infer from the name alone that this is for crediting a customer.

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

Deploy Server