QuickBooks Online MCP Server

get_preferences

Retrieves company preferences from QuickBooks Online, including accounting method, class and department tracking, and purchase order settings.

Instructions

Retrieve company preferences from QuickBooks Online, including accounting method, class and department tracking, and purchase order settings.

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": "get_preferences"
  }
}

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

Behavior3/5

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

No annotations are supplied, so the description carries the full burden. "Retrieve" implies a non-destructive read and the listed fields hint at the response content, but there is nothing about permissions, realm scoping, caching, or what happens when preferences are unset.

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?

One front-loaded sentence with no filler; the resource is stated first and the returned fields follow. It could be marginally improved only by adding a short clause about usage or the params wrapper.

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

Completeness3/5

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

With no annotations and no output schema, the field enumeration partially compensates by telling the agent what data to expect. However, the empty required params object and the lack of any sibling differentiation leave genuine gaps for a tool in a namespace this large.

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 schema describes a single free-form "params" object with no properties and 0% description coverage, and the description says nothing about what belongs in it. An agent cannot tell from either source whether params must be empty, can carry filters, or accepts arbitrary keys.

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 ("Retrieve") and resource ("company preferences from QuickBooks Online") and enumerates the settings returned, so an agent knows exactly what comes back. It does not explicitly distinguish itself from the nearby get_company_info sibling, which also sounds like a company-level read.

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, no prerequisites, and no reference to alternatives such as get_company_info. The agent must infer that this is the tool to call before create_* operations to learn the accounting method or class/department tracking flags.

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

Deploy Server