Search QuickBooks tax rates by name with partial matching. Get matching tax rate records to confirm applicable rates for invoices and transactions.
Search TaxRate records by Name (LIKE match).
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| term | Yes | Search term matched against Name with LIKE '%term%' | |
| maxResults | No | Maximum number of results to return (default: 100, max: 1000) | |
| startPosition | No | Starting position for pagination (1-based, default: 1) |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.5.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries full burden but only mentions 'LIKE match', which hints at partial matching. It fails to disclose pagination behavior (startPosition, maxResults), case sensitivity, or what happens on no results. This is insufficient for a complete understanding.
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?
The description is a single clear sentence, front-loading the core purpose. While concise, it could slightly expand on pagination without becoming verbose. Still, it is efficient and well-structured.
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?
Given the low complexity (3 parameters, no output schema, no nested objects), the description covers the basic action but lacks details on when to use vs siblings and behavioral nuances like pagination. It is minimally adequate but not complete.
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%, so baseline is 3. The description adds 'Name' and 'LIKE match' which align with the 'term' parameter but does not add meaning beyond the schema for startPosition or maxResults. It neither enhances nor detracts.
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 explicitly states the verb 'Search', the resource 'TaxRate records', and the method 'by Name (LIKE match)'. It clearly distinguishes itself from sibling tools like qbo_tax_rates_get (retrieve by ID) and qbo_tax_rates_list (list all), making its purpose unambiguous.
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?
The description implies usage when a name-based search is needed but does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives such as qbo_tax_rates_get or qbo_tax_rates_list. No exclusions or criteria are provided, leaving some ambiguity.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.