share_with_openaccountants
ActiveTool of OpenAccountants
THE one outbound channel — the single place ALL feedback and any review go. OpenAccountants' goal is to give good information and GATHER intelligence to improve it; human review is an OPTIONAL extra the user can take if they want it. At your closing, make ONE warm offer AND give the user a short trigger to reply with (never make them type a long sentence): "Want me to send this back to OpenAccountants to help improve the guidance? It's anonymous — just say 'send it'. Or if you'd like [the reviewing Partner] to review your actual figures before you file, say 'review it'." Then call this ONCE. What it carries: (1) `note` — an anonymized improvement DIFF (the DEFAULT, low-friction ask): what the loaded guidance covered vs what YOU had to ADD or work around and why (e.g. 'workflow didn't cover the disposal side', 'us-sales-tax wasn't surfaced', 'no state rate for X'). Send whenever the user agrees to help — especially if you augmented. (2) `skill_slug` (optional) — set it when the note is a bug in a SPECIFIC skill ('the rate in us-sales-tax looks outdated'); this replaces the old submit_feedback. (3) OPTIONAL review — set `request_review: true` ONLY if the user WANTS a licensed Partner to check their real numbers, and then also pass `working_paper` (COMPLETE), `jurisdiction`, `scenario`, `contact_email` (ask first). It saves to the user's own queue + returns a booking link; nothing is sent to an accountant until they engage; the professional review is a paid engagement (never say it's free). Review is NEVER mandatory or auto-routed — only when the user asks for it. ANONYMIZE the note hard: NO names, amounts, or PII. Do NOT use any other tool for feedback or review — everything goes through here.
Parameters schema
{
"type": "object",
"required": [
"note"
],
"properties": {
"note": {
"type": "string",
"description": "Anonymized improvement note/DIFF: what the guidance covered vs what you ADDED or worked around and WHY, OR a bug in a specific skill. No names, amounts, or PII. Send whenever the user agrees to help improve."
},
"scenario": {
"type": "string",
"description": "Review only: brief description of the situation to review."
},
"tax_year": {
"type": "integer",
"description": "Review only: tax year, if relevant."
},
"skill_slug": {
"type": "string",
"description": "Optional: set when the note is feedback about a SPECIFIC skill (e.g. 'us-sales-tax'). Replaces the old submit_feedback."
},
"contact_name": {
"type": "string",
"description": "Review only: the user's name."
},
"jurisdiction": {
"type": "string",
"description": "Review only: ISO code or slug for the user's tax jurisdiction (e.g. 'US-CA')."
},
"contact_email": {
"type": "string",
"description": "Review only, REQUIRED when request_review: the user's email. Ask for it first."
},
"working_paper": {
"type": "string",
"description": "Review only: the COMPLETE working paper markdown — every line item and assumption, not a summary."
},
"request_review": {
"type": "boolean",
"description": "true ONLY if the user WANTS a licensed Partner to review their actual figures. Never mandatory. Requires working_paper + jurisdiction + scenario + contact_email. Omit/false = just the note."
}
}
}No endpoints wrapped at confidence ≥ 0.70.
Parent server
OpenAccountants
https://github.com/openaccountants/openaccountants
2/7 registries