QuickBooks Online MCP Server

search_classes

Search QuickBooks Online classes using optional name, active status, and limit filters to find the class records you need.

Instructions

Search for classes in QuickBooks Online with optional filters.

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": "search_classes"
  }
}

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

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 says very little. Read-only behavior is only implied by 'Search,' and there is no mention of pagination via limit, default result counts, or what a returned class record contains.

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?

A single short sentence that is front-loaded with the verb and resource and contains no filler. It is efficient, though its brevity is part of the under-specification problem rather than a virtue.

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?

For a simple search tool with no output schema and a small nested parameter set, the description is minimally adequate to invoke the tool. It omits filter names, default/max limits, and result shape, which matter given zero annotation coverage.

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 coverage is reported at 0% for the nested params object, so the description should compensate, but 'optional filters' never names name, active, or limit. The schema's own field descriptions do the real work here, and the prose adds nothing beyond them.

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 uses a specific verb and resource, 'Search for classes in QuickBooks Online,' making the operation immediately identifiable. It doesn't distinguish this from sibling tools like get_class (single-class lookup) or create_class/update_class, but the search intent is unambiguous.

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?

'With optional filters' implies this is the tool for filtered class listing, which is the correct implied usage. However, it never states when to prefer get_class for a known ID or when an unfiltered listing is appropriate, leaving the agent to infer the boundary with siblings.

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

Deploy Server