Skip to main content
Glama
chrischall

freshbooks-mcp

by chrischall
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

freshbooks_update_estimate

Destructive

Update an existing FreshBooks estimate by sending only changed fields, leaving others untouched. Confirms changes before applying and replaces line items only when provided.

Instructions

Update an existing estimate. Only the supplied fields are sent; anything omitted is left alone. Asks the user to confirm first: a confirmation prompt where the client supports one; otherwise the first call returns a preview and a confirmToken and makes no network call, and only a repeat call with that token proceeds (see MCP_CONFIRM_MODE). Supplying lines REPLACES the whole line set — include each existing line's lineid to keep it. Returns the re-fetched estimate.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYesEstimate id
linesNoFull replacement line set. Include lineid on a line to update it in place.
notesNoNotes shown on the estimate
termsNoTerms shown on the estimate
fieldsNoAdditional raw FreshBooks estimate fields, merged into the payload — e.g. {"vis_state": 1} to soft-delete. Field names are not validated.
po_numberNo
customeridNoClient the estimate is for
create_dateNoEstimate date, YYYY-MM-DD
descriptionNoEstimate description / summary line
confirmTokenNoONLY for the two-step confirmation fallback (a client without MCP elicitation). The confirmToken from this same tool's phase-1 "confirmation-required" response, passed back ONLY after the user has seen that preview and explicitly approved it in chat — never on the first call, never invented, never reused. Call again with the same arguments. Ignored when the client supports elicitation.
presentationNoPresentation block — theme_primary_color, theme_font_name, image_logo_src, date_format and friends.
currency_codeNoCurrency code, e.g. "USD"
discount_valueNoDiscount percentage as a decimal string, e.g. "30"
estimate_numberNoUser-visible estimate number, e.g. "0000654"

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changedv1.1.0
    • removedInput schema / properties / confirm
      Removed value: -{
-  "description": "Must be true to proceed. Without this, the tool returns a preview.",
-  "type": "boolean"
-}
    • addedInput schema / properties / confirmToken
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "ONLY for the two-step confirmation fallback (a client without MCP elicitation). The confirmToken from this same tool's phase-1 \"confirmation-required\" response, passed back ONLY after the user has seen that preview and explicitly approved it in chat — never on the first call, never invented, never reused. Call again with the same arguments. Ignored when the client supports elicitation.",
+  "type": "string"
+}
  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. Addedv0.3.1

TDQS

A4.7/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations declare destructive/not-idempotent/write, and the description goes well beyond them: it discloses the confirmation requirement, the two-step preview+confirmToken fallback that makes no network call, the destructive whole-set replacement of lines, and the re-fetched return. This is exactly the extra behavioral context annotations cannot carry.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Front-loads the purpose, then layers in update semantics, confirmation behavior, the lines warning, and the return value in a tight sequence. Dense but every sentence carries actionable information with no filler.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

With no output schema, the description supplies the return behavior ('Returns the re-fetched estimate') and fully covers the confirmation workflow and destructive lines replacement. Nothing an agent needs to invoke this 14-param mutation correctly is missing.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 93%, so the baseline is 3, but the description adds real meaning: it explains that omitted fields are untouched (patch semantics across all 14 optional params) and reinforces the lineid-based replacement rule for lines. The confirmToken usage note is also restated usefully, though much of it duplicates schema text.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb and resource ('Update an existing estimate') and immediately scopes it as a partial update ('Only the supplied fields are sent; anything omitted is left alone'). The estimate resource distinguishes it cleanly from the invoice/expense/project siblings.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

Gives clear operational context: the confirmation flow that gates the call, and the critical rule that supplying lines replaces the whole set so existing lineids must be included. It stops short of naming an alternative tool or stating when-not-to-use, so it's strong context without explicit routing.

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