QuickBooks Online MCP Server

delete_transfer

Deletes a QuickBooks Online transfer by identifier, removing duplicate or incorrect transfer records from the accounting system.

Instructions

Delete a transfer 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_transfer"
  }
}

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 behavioral burden, and it discloses almost nothing: not whether deletion is permanent or reversible, whether it requires specific permissions, or whether linked transactions are affected. It only implies the mutation via the word 'Delete', which is already evident from the name.

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?

One short sentence with no filler, so nothing is wasted, but the brevity reflects under-specification rather than discipline. The single statement is front-loaded but carries too little information to earn its place as the only guidance.

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 mutation with no annotations, no output schema, and an undocumented nested parameter, the definition is substantially incomplete. An agent cannot determine return behavior, failure modes, or the shape of 'idOrEntity' from anything provided.

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?

The single parameter 'idOrEntity' has 0% schema description coverage and is genuinely ambiguous (a bare ID versus a full entity object), and the description adds no clarification. It also does not explain the free-form additionalProperties allowed in the nested params object.

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 names a specific verb ('Delete') and resource ('a transfer') and scopes it to QuickBooks Online, so the operation is unambiguous. It does not, however, differentiate this tool from the many other delete_* siblings or reference the related get_transfer/update_transfer operations.

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 when-to-use guidance: nothing about when deletion is appropriate versus updating or voiding a transfer, no prerequisites, and no mention of sibling tools. An agent must infer all selection logic from the tool name alone.

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

Deploy Server