QuickBooks Online MCP Server

delete_vendor_credit

Removes a vendor credit from QuickBooks Online using its ID or entity reference, letting you correct or clean up credit records tied to a vendor.

Instructions

Delete a vendor 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": "delete_vendor_credit"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`params`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Nov 6, 2026

TDQS

C2.7/5.0

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, yet it adds nothing beyond the name: no disclosure of irreversibility, required permissions, side effects on applied credits or vendor balances, or confirmation behavior. The only behavioral signal is the word 'Delete', which the tool name already conveys.

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 short sentence with zero redundant wording and the action is front-loaded. The brevity is efficient rather than padded, though it edges into under-specification given the complexity of a destructive operation.

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, a nested/opaque parameter object, and zero schema coverage, the description is far too thin. An agent has no way to know what identifier format to pass or what the consequence of a successful or failed delete is.

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 single parameter 'idOrEntity' is declared as an empty object with no type, description, or structure. The description says nothing about whether it expects a numeric ID, a string, or a full entity object, leaving the one input an agent must supply completely ambiguous.

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 a specific resource ('vendor credit') and scopes it to QuickBooks Online, so an agent can immediately tell what the tool does. It does not, however, distinguish itself from the many sibling delete_* tools (delete_vendor, delete_bill, delete_credit_memo) beyond the resource noun.

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 get_vendor_credit, update_vendor_credit, or search_vendor_credits, and no prerequisites such as whether the credit must first be unapplied from a bill before deletion. Nothing states that this is an irreversible operation or when it should be avoided.

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

Deploy Server