Retrieve a specific journal entry by its unique ID from QuickBooks Online to access the complete record for verification, auditing, or financial reporting.
Get a specific JournalEntry record by its ID.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| journalEntryId | Yes | The unique JournalEntry ID |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.4.4Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behaviors. It only states 'Get a specific JournalEntry record,' implying a non-destructive read, but doesn't mention error handling, return values, or potential side effects.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
Extremely concise: one sentence, front-loaded with the action and resource. No unnecessary words, earning a perfect score.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
For a simple retrieval tool with one required parameter and no output schema, the description is mostly complete. However, it could mention the behavior if the ID is not found or any authentication requirements, but overall adequate.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema coverage is 100% with one parameter described as 'The unique JournalEntry ID.' The description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema, meeting the baseline expectation.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description clearly states the action (Get) and resource (a specific JournalEntry record by its ID). It distinguishes from sibling tools like qbo_journal_entries_list and qbo_journal_entries_create by focusing on a single record retrieval.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., qbo_journal_entries_list for multiple records). The description lacks context about prerequisites or scenarios where this tool is appropriate.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.