Skip to main content
Glama
chrischall

freshbooks-mcp

by chrischall
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

freshbooks_get_record

Read-only

Retrieve a single FreshBooks accounting record by resource name and ID to view exact invoice, client, expense, or other entry details.

Instructions

Get a single record from any FreshBooks accounting resource by name and id. Ids are numeric on every resource mapped here; the schema also accepts a string so an id carried around as text still works.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYesThe record id — numeric for all currently mapped resources (digits only if passed as text)
resourceYesAccounting resource to read. All use the alphanumeric accountId.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changedv1.2.2
    • changedInput schema / properties / id / anyOf
      Previous value: -[
-  {
-    "exclusiveMinimum": 0,
-    "maximum": 9007199254740991,
-    "type": "integer"
-  },
-  {
-    "minLength": 1,
-    "type": "string"
-  }
-]New value: +[
+  {
+    "exclusiveMinimum": 0,
+    "maximum": 9007199254740991,
+    "type": "integer"
+  },
+  {
+    "pattern": "^[1-9]\\d*$",
+    "type": "string"
+  }
+]
    • changedInput schema / properties / id / description
      Previous value: -"The record id — numeric for all currently mapped resources"New value: +"The record id — numeric for all currently mapped resources (digits only if passed as text)"
  2. Changed1 schema field changedv0.7.0
    • changedInput schema / $schema
      Previous value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"New value: +"https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema"
  3. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

B3.2/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered and not contradicted. The description adds only a minor behavioral note that string ids are coerced, and says nothing about missing-record behavior or error shape, so it clears the lowered bar without adding much.

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?

Two tight sentences with the core action front-loaded and no filler. The second sentence is somewhat redundant with the schema's id description, which keeps it just short of a 5.

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?

No output schema exists, but a read-only single-record fetch whose parameters are fully specified needs little return documentation. The remaining gap is sibling disambiguation against the typed getters and list_records, which the description never addresses.

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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so both parameters are already documented in full, including the enum of resource names and the integer-or-digit-string id rule. The description's id explanation largely restates the schema's own wording ('numeric for all currently mapped resources'), so baseline 3 applies.

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 concrete verb (get) and resource (a single record from any FreshBooks accounting resource) scoped by name and id. It is unambiguous what the tool returns, but it never distinguishes itself from the many typed siblings (get_invoice, get_client, get_expense) or from list_records, which an agent must reconcile on its own.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

No when-to-use guidance is given. With 17 resource-specific get_* siblings plus list_records, the description should say when the generic lookup is preferable (e.g. unmapped or dynamic resource names) versus the typed getter, but it offers neither conditions nor alternatives.

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