Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
QuickBooks Online MCP Server

QuickBooks Online MCP Server

by NightSquawk
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

report_general_ledger

Generate a General Ledger Detail report with all transactions per account and running balances; use 1–3 month ranges to avoid oversized responses.

Instructions

Run a General Ledger Detail report showing all transactions per account with running balances. WARNING: Large date ranges may produce very large responses — use 1-3 month ranges. Supports date range, accounting method, filters, and detail extras (columns, sorting).

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": "report_general_ledger"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
paramsYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A3.5/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden, and it does disclose one valuable behavioral trait: large date ranges produce very large responses. It says nothing about pagination, permissions, response structure, or whether results are read-only snapshots, leaving notable gaps for an unannotated tool.

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?

Three sentences, front-loaded with what the report is, then the size warning, then a capability summary. No filler; the warning is capitalized and easy to spot. Slightly denser than ideal but every sentence carries information.

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

Completeness4/5

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

There is no output schema, and the description compensates by naming the report's contents (per-account transactions with running balances) and warning about response volume. For a report-generation tool with a well-documented nested schema, this covers what an agent needs to invoke it correctly, though it omits any note on result limits or account-ID discovery.

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

Parameters3/5

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

The description groups the parameters into 'date range, accounting method, filters, and detail extras (columns, sorting)', which helps an agent navigate the nested params object. The nested properties are themselves documented in the schema, so the description adds organization rather than new semantics; the top-level 'params' wrapper is undescribed in both places.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Run a General Ledger Detail report') plus the report content ('all transactions per account with running balances'), which separates it from generic list tools. It does not explicitly name close siblings like report_journal or report_transaction_list_with_splits, so an agent must infer the boundary from the report name.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Gives concrete operational guidance on date ranges ('use 1-3 month ranges'), which is real when-to-use advice. However it offers no guidance on choosing this over the other report_* tools (journal, transaction list, trial balance) or on prerequisites such as which account IDs to supply.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools