QuickBooks Online MCP Server

delete_time_activity

Deletes a time activity from QuickBooks Online using its ID or entity reference, enabling AI agents to remove or correct tracked billable hours.

Instructions

Delete a time activity 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": "delete_time_activity"
  }
}

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 confirms the operation is a delete. It says nothing about irreversibility, permission requirements, failure modes when the record is referenced elsewhere, or what is returned on success. For a destructive mutation with zero annotation coverage, this is a significant gap.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness3/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The single sentence is free of waste and front-loads the verb, but it is under-specified rather than efficient. There is no structure to separate intent, preconditions, or argument expectations.

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 destructive single-record mutation with no annotations, no output schema, and no parameter documentation, the definition leaves out everything an agent needs: identifier format, side effects, and error behavior. It is barely minimally viable.

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%: the single nested parameter exposes 'idOrEntity' as an untyped empty schema with additionalProperties allowed. The description does nothing to explain whether the argument accepts a raw ID, a reference, or a full entity object, so an agent cannot reliably construct the call from the definition alone.

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 pairs a specific verb ('Delete') with a specific QuickBooks resource ('time activity'), which is enough to tell it apart from create_time_activity, update_time_activity, get_time_activity, and search_time_activities. It stops short of 5 because it adds no scope detail (e.g., single-record removal by ID) beyond what the name already conveys.

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 update_time_activity or search_time_activities, no preconditions (e.g., whether the time activity must be unbilled or not linked to an invoice), and no note that the operation is irreversible. The agent must infer everything from the tool name.

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

Deploy Server