Find QuickBooks vendors by matching DisplayName partially. Retrieve vendor details for accurate expense and payment management.
Search Vendor records by DisplayName (LIKE match).
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| term | Yes | Search term matched against DisplayName 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.
v1.4.4Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses the search mechanism (LIKE match) but omits behavioral details like case-sensitivity, pagination behavior, or output format. The input schema covers pagination, but the description could be more explicit.
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, short sentence that conveys essential information with no unnecessary words. It is front-loaded and efficient.
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 search tool with three parameters and no output schema, the combination of description and schema is mostly complete. It might benefit from noting that it returns a list of vendor objects, but the pattern is standard.
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 each parameter described. The description reiterates the 'LIKE match' for the term parameter but adds little new meaning beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate.
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 (search), resource (Vendor records), and method (LIKE match on DisplayName). It distinguishes from siblings like qbo_vendors_list and qbo_vendors_get by specifying the filter criteria.
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 when to use this tool (when searching by name pattern) and distinguishes from listing all vendors or getting by ID. However, it lacks explicit guidance on when not to use it or alternatives like exact match.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.